FONTFORGE FASTER TURN OFF CODE

(This is a weak indicator of likelihood of future engagement, but it's something.)Ĭode quality is, of course, something that can be improved through engagement. Engagement of the contributor at the time of contribution. General applicability of the functionalityĬ. Acceptance into contrib should be based on the combination of:Ī.I suggest we just warn contributors that 'we' can implement pieces of their contributions in C and remove their work as we see fit in the future and not worry about it beyond that.

FONTFORGE FASTER TURN OFF CODE

I think there has been some mild resistance in the past to adding scripts for things that could be added in C code without too much trouble.So it would be nice to have something concrete in the mean time.Īnyway, I'm opening this issue to suggest and start a discussion about some conventions for accepting contributions to be shipped with FontForge. That's still a worthy goal but a) it hasn't happened (yet?) and b) such a system still relies on users being able to find what they need. I've made noises in the past about creating a robust 'plugin' system that would allow 'outside' contributors to deliver their own functionality through python modules (installed with pip, for example). contrib had become a place to put 'fragile' projects that mixed C and python interfaces, and the move to GDK had altered the cost/benefit ratio against them.

That was not out of skepticism about external contributions in general (I don't think), it had more to do with what had wound up there.

In the past year most of the contents of FontForge's contrib directory were either removed from the repo or pulled out of the release build process.

Fontforge faster turn off