[aur-general] ttf-droid-sans duplicate of community/ttf-droid?

[Pedro Alejandro López-Valencia]

El may 28, 2014 4:47 PM, "Bartłomiej Piotrowski" <b at bpiotrowski.pl>
escribió:
>
> On Wed, 28 May 2014 16:19:16 -0500
> Pedro Alejandro López-Valencia <palopezv at gmail.com> wrote:
> > El may 28, 2014 1:31 PM, "Bartłomiej Piotrowski" <b at bpiotrowski.pl>
> > escribió:
> > >
> > > On Sun, 25 May 2014 12:57:43 +0200
> > > SanskritFritz <sanskritfritz at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Jerome Leclanche
> > > > <adys.wh at 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.