Hi, Le 17/06/2018 à 09:31, Thomas Goirand a écrit : > On 06/16/2018 03:57 PM, Alexis Murzeau wrote: >> On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 13:31:48 +0100 Sean Whitton >> <spwhit...@spwhitton.name> wrote: >>> Hello Vasudev, >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 05:16:05PM +0530, Vasudev Kamath wrote: >>>> >>>> I read through and prepared a version to experimental which symlinks >>>> fa-solid-900.ttf as fontawesome-webfont.ttf. I've uploaded it to >>>> experimental, can you please check if this helps?. >>>> >>>> @Others Please let me know if this new version in experimental with >>>> suggestion from Thomas improves situation in your cases. >>> >>> This does not help the mkdocs-bootstrap case. That appears to need the >>> .woff2 font. >>> >>> -- >>> Sean Whitton >> >> Hi, >> >> This and openstack-dashboard install failure require more symlinks and >> files from v4. >> >> Isn't reverting the package to v4 while creating a new one for the >> version 5 (say fonts-font-awesome-5) better to handle all these v4/5 >> breaks ? > > I agree, also because even with the symlinks, there would be still 4 > missing glyphs in the openstack-dashboard (I tried and survey it). > Though, I could probably find replacements in fa-solid-900, it'd be > nicer to just not break things. > >> I'm not sure it is a good solution trying to patch fonts-font-awesome v5 >> to be compatible with v4 while upstream might continue to even more >> break things with v4 later. >> >> Subsequent maintenance on the v4 package should not require much work as >> upstream says they don't plan any further versions on the v4 branch [1]: > > I agree. > >> So this v4 package would be dropped once other packages move to >> fonts-font-awesome-5 with proper upgrade path (ie. without hacks to fake >> v4 with v5). Especially packages that use sphinx RTD theme where >> upstream still use v4 and it seems many packages actually have a >> theme.css based on that theme. >> >> I myself tried to patch theme.css to use fonts-font-awesome 5 shim but >> its a ugly big approximate patch that happen to mostly work :( [2] >> >> What do you think about this ? > > I also would like to highlight that what you're describing here is the > workflow of a transition, which is what Debian has been doing for > *years*. Not only this is natural in Debian, but it is also very much > recommended when breakage occurs. > > I'm by the way a bit frustrated that this process is taking so long. > This has a huge impact in the maintenance of a big dozen of my packages, > since Horizon can't be installed. Reverting is really not a lot of work. > Can we get this done soon, as it seems to be the consensus? If the > current font-awesome maintainer is busy, maybe someone else (me?) can do > the work?
@Vasudev, what do you think about this ? (As far as I'm concerned, I'm ok with this and Thomas said it shouldn't be a lot of work to do.) > > Cheers, > > Thomas Goirand (zigo) > -- Alexis Murzeau PGP: B7E6 0EBB 9293 7B06 BDBC 2787 E7BD 1904 F480 937F
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
