(I opened a pagure ticket about this too:
https://pagure.io/fonts-rpm-macros/issue/26)
Since the git repo for fonts-rpm-macros has been out of sync for 5+ years
now due to the Fedora package reverting back to 2.0 at that time. We have
been thinking it would be better to fork a new branch and probably also
move to a new repo at the same time given that Fedora use of pagure.io is
being replaced with Fedora Forge <https://forge.fedoraproject.org/> soon.
My thought is roughly that we should fork off the current main branch from
the 2.0.5 tag (corresponding to the current fedora tarball) and then cherry
pick recent commits and/or apply patches from the Fedora package to create
a new repo in sync with what is currently being shipped.
Given that it is an official Fedora project it seems most natural to either
host it in the new Fedora Forge (Forgejo), or gitlab.com/fedora or possibly
github. One consideration brought up was CI, though currently there isn't
any but I don't know how much we will lean on that.
Any thoughts or particular suggestions?
Jens
Am reviewing amir-samaano-fonts [1], which includes a variable font. When both variable and fall back regular fonts are packaged, some applications such as Inkscape may have difficulty indicating which fonts are available. If just a variable font is packaged, Inkscape and other applications such as Abiword, Gimp and Krita, seem to be ok and give reasonable options for thin, medium and bold weights and for italic and underline. Application support is evolving. Should packagers choose to either package the variable fonts or the classical fonts, or if both are offered, make them conflicting separate packages?
The current release does not have good support for color fonts, for example try Kalnia Glaze Fonts[2], but support for these is still growing in applications outside of web fonts.
1) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2330850
2) https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/fed500/fmedrano-kalnia-glaze-fonts/