open-relay-typefaces: init at 2025-03-20, subsumes kreative-square-fonts#399148
open-relay-typefaces: init at 2025-03-20, subsumes kreative-square-fonts#399148flokli merged 1 commit intoNixOS:masterfrom
Conversation
github-actions
Bot
added
10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10
|
Heh. I guess it needs a fundamentally different design. I hate monorepos. |
|
Well, for the record, the code does work as is even if a refactor is needed. |
toastal
force-pushed
the
open-relay-typefaces
branch
from
6b50bc0 to
5a593c4
Compare
toastal
changed the title
toastal
force-pushed
the
open-relay-typefaces
branch
4 times, most recently
from
38c480e to
bd66a45
Compare
toastal
changed the title
toastal
force-pushed
the
open-relay-typefaces
branch
from
bd66a45 to
b4853e2
Compare
|
Works post-refactor too. |
toastal
force-pushed
the
open-relay-typefaces
branch
2 times, most recently
from
1a406ae to
30c1455
Compare
listx
left a comment
listx
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey sorry for the late response.
This refactor brings in more fonts from open-relay, which deprecates the old kreative-square-fonts package I created a while back. Seems reasonable.
I have a couple questions but they are non-blocking. Approved, thanks.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: Would it make more sense to use something like open-relay-fonts.kreative-square for the name? My Nix is rusty and to me this just looks like we're expecting users to install the fonts only by their name. But these fonts all come from open-relay so maybe it makes sense to group them together somehow?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Tough call since I don’t see it as much with everything trying to flatten (tho I prefer nesting myself).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Other top-level nested things are like ocamlPackages, gnomeExtension, linuxKernel, libsForQt5, where 4 fonts seems a bit out of place—tho lohit-fonts + mplus-outline-fonts are there.
If I were a Nixpkgs maintainer, I would personally like to see fonts in its own attrset like the aforementioned ocamlPackages since there is a lot of names used just for fonts & fonts, while being software, generally tend to ship as is versus the from-source build approach (tho I would venture to guess Google Fonts requiring a repository with the prebuilt font has something to do with that). It would also make certain operations easier since you could do with pkgs.fonts; … or have the system font setups take a callback with the fonts (such as { fonts.packages = (fonts: with fonts; [ roboto ]); }).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If I were a Nixpkgs maintainer, I would personally like to see fonts in its own attrset like [...]
You /are/ a nixpkgs maintainer. You might not have the commit bit yet, but that's not a requirement to propose refactors in nixpkgs. It's more of a Do-ocracy, there's not a font institution inside the community responsible for a fonts attribute 😆
If you're serious about this, open an issue, highlighting people previously involved. Maybe prototype on the "how" somewhere local before, and open a draft PR once it cooked a bit more. This shouldn't be self-merged anyways, but needs to be reviewed by people frequently interacting with the font system, so commit bits are orthogonal.
toastal
force-pushed
the
open-relay-typefaces
branch
2 times, most recently
from
707bec2 to
701e25a
Compare
Reference open-relay’s monorepo typefaces from a central location. Refactor kreative-square-fonts to fall under this umbrella.
toastal
force-pushed
the
open-relay-typefaces
branch
from
701e25a to
91f06db
Compare
|
|
|
@leona-ya … just saw that & was about to push a fix |
5 participants
Reference open-relay’s kreative-kore monorepo typefaces from a central location. Refactor kreative-square-fonts to fall under this umbrella.
Things done
nix.conf? (See Nix manual)sandbox = relaxedsandbox = truenix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage./result/bin/)Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.
1
Footnotes
Please consider giving up MS GitHub or offering a non-proprietary, non-US-corporate-controlled mirror for this free software project. I wish to delete this Microsoft account in the future, but I need more projects like this to support alternative methods to send patches & contribute. ↩