kuba at mareimbrium.org
Fri Apr 28 08:15:04 CDT 2006
> > IMHO that's too much. Even 100K would be.
> I agree, this is a _lot_ of code for what? It's not like we can
> make heads or tails of the diffs for fonts anyway. I agree that
> is good not to have binary files in CVS, but these are binary
> files that are cross platform, need not be rebuild by users, etc.
> We are paying a hefty price for this -- only the discussions up
> to this point counted for probably tens of precious developer hours,
> not to mention the hundred of hours of user frustration.
> In fact, these 'noarch' binary files in CVS are not such a big deal.
> It turns out that every Java project is checking in 3rd party jars
> without one single negative side effect. Font files are just like
> .jar files. Lets just commit them and be done with it.
Nice to hear another voice of reason in all this mess. I hope that sfd2ttf
and all the related *#$%!@ will be gone from wine as soon as possible.
I don't think that wine should depend on fontforge either. If and
when necessary, the ttfs can be regenerated by hand and checked in
by whomever changed the sfds. All it takes is a small readme file in
the directory where the sfds are, to describe the necessary steps and
prerequisites. Heck, you can even have a tiny handwritten makefile in there.
More information about the wine-devel