[aur-general] ttf-droid-sans duplicate of community/ttf-droid?
I don't really understand the difference between community/ttf-droid and any of these: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&K=ttf-droid Any idea about duplicates in there? J. Leclanche
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Jerome Leclanche <adys.wh@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't really understand the difference between community/ttf-droid and any of these: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&K=ttf-droid
Any idea about duplicates in there?
ttf-droid-sans Comment by graysky 2012-10-16 21:14 This is only the sans version; the package in [community] contains more flavors.
On Sun, 25 May 2014 12:57:43 +0200 SanskritFritz <sanskritfritz@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Jerome Leclanche <adys.wh@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't really understand the difference between community/ttf-droid and any of these: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&K=ttf-droid
Any idea about duplicates in there?
ttf-droid-sans Comment by graysky 2012-10-16 21:14 This is only the sans version; the package in [community] contains more flavors.
I'm a bit unsure if it's worth a standalone package. Unwanted files can be ignored via NoExtract in pacman.conf… -- Bartłomiej Piotrowski http://bpiotrowski.pl/
El may 28, 2014 1:31 PM, "Bartłomiej Piotrowski" <b@bpiotrowski.pl> escribió:
On Sun, 25 May 2014 12:57:43 +0200 SanskritFritz <sanskritfritz@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Jerome Leclanche <adys.wh@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't really understand the difference between community/ttf-droid and any of these: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&K=ttf-droid
Any idea about duplicates in there?
ttf-droid-sans Comment by graysky 2012-10-16 21:14 This is only the sans version; the package in [community] contains more flavors.
I'm a bit unsure if it's worth a standalone package. Unwanted files can be ignored via NoExtract in pacman.conf…
Not in this case. The packege in community should really be split into several different ones that reflect the style and width variants, namely normal vs codensed and sans vs serif.
On 28/05, Pedro Alejandro López-Valencia wrote:
Not in this case. The packege in community should really be split into several different ones that reflect the style and width variants, namely normal vs codensed and sans vs serif.
Splitting them up for no reason just seems unnecessary and uses up time needlessly. -- Sincerely, Johannes Löthberg PGP Key ID: 3A9D0BB5
On Wed, 28 May 2014 16:19:16 -0500 Pedro Alejandro López-Valencia <palopezv@gmail.com> wrote:
El may 28, 2014 1:31 PM, "Bartłomiej Piotrowski" <b@bpiotrowski.pl> escribió:
On Sun, 25 May 2014 12:57:43 +0200 SanskritFritz <sanskritfritz@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Jerome Leclanche <adys.wh@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't really understand the difference between community/ttf-droid and any of these: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&K=ttf-droid
Any idea about duplicates in there?
ttf-droid-sans Comment by graysky 2012-10-16 21:14 This is only the sans version; the package in [community] contains more flavors.
I'm a bit unsure if it's worth a standalone package. Unwanted files can be ignored via NoExtract in pacman.conf…
Not in this case. The packege in community should really be split into several different ones that reflect the style and width variants, namely normal vs codensed and sans vs serif.
This way we should also split ttf-bitstream-vera, ttf-dejavu, ttf-freefont, ttf-liberation and ttf-ubuntu-family. Why limit ourselves to only normal, condensed and so on? Let's split bold and monoscape variants too, because it can save 15MB of our incredibly small hard drives. I'll wait a week with any further actions to see if fellow TUs have different opinion. -- Bartłomiej Piotrowski http://bpiotrowski.pl/
El may 28, 2014 4:47 PM, "Bartłomiej Piotrowski" <b@bpiotrowski.pl> escribió:
On Wed, 28 May 2014 16:19:16 -0500 Pedro Alejandro López-Valencia <palopezv@gmail.com> wrote:
El may 28, 2014 1:31 PM, "Bartłomiej Piotrowski" <b@bpiotrowski.pl> escribió:
On Sun, 25 May 2014 12:57:43 +0200 SanskritFritz <sanskritfritz@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Jerome Leclanche <adys.wh@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't really understand the difference between community/ttf-droid and any of these: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&K=ttf-droid
Any idea about duplicates in there?
ttf-droid-sans Comment by graysky 2012-10-16 21:14 This is only the sans version; the package in [community] contains more flavors.
I'm a bit unsure if it's worth a standalone package. Unwanted files can be ignored via NoExtract in pacman.conf…
Not in this case. The packege in community should really be split into several different ones that reflect the style and width variants, namely normal vs codensed and sans vs serif.
This way we should also split ttf-bitstream-vera, ttf-dejavu, ttf-freefont, ttf-liberation and ttf-ubuntu-family. Why limit ourselves to only normal, condensed and so on? Let's split bold and monoscape variants too, because it can save 15MB of our incredibly small hard drives.
I'll wait a week with any further actions to see if fellow TUs have different opinion.
I can do it, if you don't mind having someone give you a hand with the task. I'm not a TU, obviusly.
I thought he was being sarcastic, and was implying that we should delete it, because what is the point of saving a couple MB on removing a small portion of a font at the expense of more packages to maintain. Regards, Justin Dray E: justin@dray.be M: 0433348284 On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Pedro Alejandro López-Valencia < palopezv@gmail.com> wrote:
El may 28, 2014 4:47 PM, "Bartłomiej Piotrowski" <b@bpiotrowski.pl> escribió:
On Wed, 28 May 2014 16:19:16 -0500 Pedro Alejandro López-Valencia <palopezv@gmail.com> wrote:
El may 28, 2014 1:31 PM, "Bartłomiej Piotrowski" <b@bpiotrowski.pl> escribió:
On Sun, 25 May 2014 12:57:43 +0200 SanskritFritz <sanskritfritz@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Jerome Leclanche <adys.wh@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't really understand the difference between community/ttf-droid and any of these: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&K=ttf-droid
Any idea about duplicates in there?
ttf-droid-sans Comment by graysky 2012-10-16 21:14 This is only the sans version; the package in [community] contains more flavors.
I'm a bit unsure if it's worth a standalone package. Unwanted files can be ignored via NoExtract in pacman.conf…
Not in this case. The packege in community should really be split into several different ones that reflect the style and width variants, namely normal vs codensed and sans vs serif.
This way we should also split ttf-bitstream-vera, ttf-dejavu, ttf-freefont, ttf-liberation and ttf-ubuntu-family. Why limit ourselves to only normal, condensed and so on? Let's split bold and monoscape variants too, because it can save 15MB of our incredibly small hard drives.
I'll wait a week with any further actions to see if fellow TUs have different opinion.
I can do it, if you don't mind having someone give you a hand with the task. I'm not a TU, obviusly.
El may 28, 2014 6:50 PM, "Justin Dray" <justin@dray.be> escribió:
I thought he was being sarcastic, and was implying that we should delete it, because what is the point of saving a couple MB on removing a small portion of a font at the expense of more packages to maintain.
I am dead serious; that's what split packages are for. And don't think for a second I missed the obvious sarcasm.
On May 28, 2014 5:23 PM, "Pedro Alejandro López-Valencia" < palopezv@gmail.com> wrote:
El may 28, 2014 6:50 PM, "Justin Dray" <justin@dray.be> escribió:
I thought he was being sarcastic, and was implying that we should delete it, because what is the point of saving a couple MB on removing a small portion of a font at the expense of more packages to maintain.
I am dead serious; that's what split packages are for.
We split packages to do things like: - avoid large documentation dumps in otherwise small packages - provide intercompatability with other packages - avoid recursive dependencies Splitting a font package to only provide specific weights or styles when they all come from the same source is really just a waste of time.
And don't think for a second I missed the obvious sarcasm.
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:47 PM, Bartłomiej Piotrowski <b@bpiotrowski.pl> wrote:
This way we should also split ttf-bitstream-vera, ttf-dejavu, ttf-freefont, ttf-liberation and ttf-ubuntu-family. Why limit ourselves to only normal, condensed and so on? Let's split bold and monoscape variants too, because it can save 15MB of our incredibly small hard drives.
I'll wait a week with any further actions to see if fellow TUs have different opinion.
Yeah, splitting font packages like crazy makes absolutely no sense to me either. Not to mention I would be quite annoyed as a user to install a ton of packages just to get all font variants. +1 for removing ttf-droid-sans
On Sat, 24 May 2014 08:35:03 +0100 Jerome Leclanche <adys.wh@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't really understand the difference between community/ttf-droid and any of these: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&K=ttf-droid
Any idea about duplicates in there?
J. Leclanche
Removed ttf-droid-sans. The rest looks like additional or modified variants of community/ttf-droid. -- Bartłomiej Piotrowski http://bpiotrowski.pl/
participants (8)
-
Bartłomiej Piotrowski
-
Dave Reisner
-
Jerome Leclanche
-
Johannes Löthberg
-
Justin Dray
-
Lukas Jirkovsky
-
Pedro Alejandro López-Valencia
-
SanskritFritz