User talk:Pfrields/DraftUpstreamRequestEmail

NicolasMailhot 17:01, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) This is already way better than what we have (which is nothing).
 * 2) When you are satisfied with the result please rename the page so its entry in the fonts packaging index looks good.
 * 3) Do not refer to fonts as software, some authors disagree with this (even though smart font instructions are software)
 * 4) * OK, fixed. -- PWF
 * 5) I'm not sure a font author will think of his release as a "package"
 * 6) * OK, fixed. -- PWF
 * 7) Many authors won't have the faintest idea what Fedora is some Linux/OLPC/Red Hat references may help
 * 8) * OK, added some reference to what Fedora is, and a link to our Overview page. -- PWF
 * 9) Very often we do not know that foo is derived from bar — that's one of the questions we want to ask authors
 * 10) * OK, added an example. -- PWF
 * 11) It's often difficult to explain why we do not want to use pre-build hand-tuned fonts and insist on rebuilding from fontforge sources (when they are available)
 * 12) * If you could try, I'll clean up the text. -- PWF
 * 13) It's often very difficult to explain why forgetting to version archives or font files makes packager life hard
 * 14) * If you could try, I'll clean up the text. -- PWF
 * 15) Maybe some reference to Archive_template_for_fonts ?
 * 16) * If that's a work in progress, it may be confusing to people who aren't FOSS-aware. Should that be completed first so it's more educational for font authors who aren't FOSS-aware? -- PWF