Orphaned fonts in Debian (ttf-arphic* & ttf-bpg-georgian-fonts)

[pabs]

Hi all,

[Please CC pkg-fonts-devel and the appropriate bug reports in reply]

The following fonts are orphaned in Debian, we should fix that:

O 503517 ttf-arphic-bkai00mp -- "AR PL KaitiM Big5" Chinese TrueType font by Arphic Technology
O 503514 ttf-arphic-bsmi00lp -- "AR PL Mingti2L Big5" Chinese TrueType font by Arphic Technology
O 503513 ttf-arphic-gbsn00lp -- "AR PL SungtiL GB" Chinese TrueType font by Arphic Technology
O 503512 ttf-arphic-gkai00mp -- "AR PL KaitiM GB" Chinese TrueType font by Arphic Technology
O 459903 ttf-bpg-georgian-fonts -- BPG Georgian fonts for the graphical installer


ttf-bpg-georgian-fonts:

This sounds like it is no longer needed by d-i:

http://wiki.debian.org/DebianInstaller/GUIFonts

debian-boot folks, can you confirm that?

Can you provide contacts for people interested in Georgian who might
like to join the Debian fonts team and adopt this package?

Or would people interested in Georgian suggest removal of
ttf-bpg-georgian-fonts from Debian?


ttf-arphic-*

These don't appear to be used by the installer. Subscribers of the
debian-chinese-* lists, could you give any information about if these
fonts are still useful?

They need a new maintainer, would any of you like to join the Debian
fonts team and adopt these packages?

Or should we remove these fonts from Debian?

--
bye,
pabs

http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Main/PaulWise

[Frans Pop-3]

On Monday 16 February 2009, pabs wrote:
> ttf-bpg-georgian-fonts
> ttf-arphic-*
>
> These don't appear to be used by the installer.

Correct, Neither of these fonts is used by the installer anymore. No
objection from the D-I team to remove them from the archive.

And if they are kept in the archive, it would probably be best to drop
their udebs.


Davide: are there any other font packages we no longer use but which still
provide udebs? If there are, could you perhaps file BRs against them
requesting to drop the udebs?

Cheers,
FJP

[Arne Goetje-3]

pabs wrote:
> ttf-arphic-*
>
> These don't appear to be used by the installer. Subscribers of the
> debian-chinese-* lists, could you give any information about if these
> fonts are still useful?

They are useful for printing and AFAIK the current latex-cjk (or was it
cjk-latex?) use those fonts. Further more, the ttf-arphic-{uming|ukai}
fonts are derived from those. So, I guess we should keep them for a while.

> They need a new maintainer, would any of you like to join the Debian
> fonts team and adopt these packages?

I can maintain them (and I am a member of the Debian fonts team).

Cheers
Arne
--
Arne Götje (高盛華) <arne@...>
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/685D1E8C
Fingerprint: 2056 F6B7 DEA8 B478 311F  1C34 6E9F D06E 685D 1E8C
Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net.   Encrypted e-mail preferred.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-chinese-big5-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Kan-Ru Chen]

On Mon, Feb 16 2009, Arne Goetje wrote:

> pabs wrote:
>> ttf-arphic-*
>>
>> These don't appear to be used by the installer. Subscribers of the
>> debian-chinese-* lists, could you give any information about if these
>> fonts are still useful?
>
> They are useful for printing and AFAIK the current latex-cjk (or was it
> cjk-latex?) use those fonts. Further more, the ttf-arphic-{uming|ukai}
> fonts are derived from those. So, I guess we should keep them for a while.
>

AFAIK, some programs and documents still uses hard-coded font names and
latex-cjk-chinese-arphic-* still build-depends on these fonts. So I
suggest we should keep them, too.

>> They need a new maintainer, would any of you like to join the Debian
>> fonts team and adopt these packages?
>
> I can maintain them (and I am a member of the Debian fonts team).
>

Arne has very good knowledge of handling fonts and is familiar with
Arphic fonts, he is the best choice :)

- Kanru