Add Iosevka Term Slab #803
Conversation
|
Well, I am hesitant to add this. Because of the sheer volume of Iosevkas, probably. But I believe the folder structure is ... not very useful. We bundle by weight and not by (sub)family/style. (Contrieved example:) Would this not make more sense? In this way users could choose which Family they want and have all weights of that family in one directory? Also related: Edit: Noticed the idea has already been voiced by @ChiefMikeK here #919 (comment) |
|
Difference between Iosevka and Iosevka Slab (Slab-serif), the normal Iosevka has no serifs.
|
[why] Both are full fledged families, one specifically for terminal, the other not. Although it might be that people want both there is a likelyhood that some just need one set. Splitting these makes the individual release packages smaller and more handable, and improves release workflow run time. See also #803 Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
[why] Both are full fledged families, one specifically for terminal, the other not. Although it might be that people want both there is a likelyhood that some just need one set. Splitting these makes the individual release packages smaller and more handable, and improves release workflow run time. [note] Also fix RFN of mononoki en passant :-} See comment on mononoki's RFN with the mononoki 1.6 update commit. See also #803 Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
[why] Both are full fledged families, one specifically for terminal, the other not. Although it might be that people want both there is a likelyhood that some just need one set. Splitting these makes the individual release packages smaller and more handable, and improves release workflow run time. [note] Also fix RFN of mononoki en passant :-} See comment on mononoki's RFN with the mononoki 1.6 update commit. See also #803 Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
|
Please merge. |
|
Marked this for 3.1.0. Du you think we need all the weights or can we drop some like ExtraLight or something? |
|
Note to self: This must be completely redone |
|
https://github.com/be5invis/Iosevka/releases/download/v22.1.1/ttf-iosevka-term-slab-22.1.1.zip NB: 22.1.1, need to update other Iosevkas |
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
|
Expanded |
Finii
force-pushed
the
feature/Add-Iosevka-Term-Slab
branch
from
7333ce1 to
09c8315
Compare
I only use the standard one myself, but I also add Medium, Italic and Bold in case I need them. There are so many weights that I don't want to add them all, ha. |
[why] We have a lot of weights, probably not all useful for terminal usages. [how] Use more current fetching script and limit number of weights. Also drop the directory substructure. Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
[why] New fonts do not get a in-repo release anymore. Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
…erm-Slab Add Iosevka Term Slab
Add Iosevka from Iosevka Release v22.1.1
https://github.com/be5invis/Iosevka/releases/tag/v22.1.1
Keep in mind, patching Iosevka needs corrected
fontforge.But that also holds for the already present Iosevkas.
Probably this should be coupled with a general Iosevka update. Here just the
Term Slabis added, the other two are untouched and an old revision!Requirements / Checklist
What does this Pull Request (PR) do?
Add another Iosevka variant, next to the already present 'standard' and 'Term' ones.
How should this be manually tested?
Any background context you can provide?
What are the relevant tickets (if any)?
Fixes: #281 see comments in the end esp. for folder structure?
Screenshots (if appropriate or helpful)