2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
{
"fonts" : [
{
2023-01-17 16:40:52 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "IBM 3270" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "3270" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "3270" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "3270 Nerd Font" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : "font3270" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "3270" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Derived from the x3270 font, a modern format of a font with high nostalgic value"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
{
"unpatchedName" : "Agave" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Agave" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Agave" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Agave Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "agave" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "agave" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"description" : "A small, monospace, outline font that is geometrically regular and simple"
} ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Anonymous Pro" ,
"RFN" : true ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Anonymice" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "AnonymousPro" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Anonymice Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : false ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "anonymice" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Inspired by Anonymous 9 on Macintosh, since 2009, distinct `O`, `0`, `I`, `l`, `1`"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "Arimo" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Arimo" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Arimo" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Arimo Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : false ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "arimo" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"description" : "Metrically similar to Arial, pan-European WGL character set, sans serif"
} ,
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Aurulent Sans Mono" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "AurulentSansMono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "AurulentSansMono" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "AurulentSansMono Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "aurulent" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "aurulent" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"description" : "Sans serif, designed by Stephen G. Hartke which also created Verily Serif"
} ,
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "BigBlue Terminal" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "BigBlueTerminal" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "BigBlueTerminal" ,
2023-01-30 08:55:58 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "BigBlue_TerminalPlus Nerd Font" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : false ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "bigblue-terminal" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Nostalgic, closely based on IBM's 8x14 EGA/VGA charset"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Bitstream Vera Sans Mono" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "BitstreamVeraSansMono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "BitstreamVeraSansMono" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "BitstreamVeraSansMono Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "bitstream-vera" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "bitstream-vera-sans-mono" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Dotted zero, compact lowercase characters"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
{
"unpatchedName" : "Cascadia Code" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : true ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Caskaydia Cove" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "CascadiaCode" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Caskaydia Cove Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "cascadia-code" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "caskaydia-cove" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"description" : "A fun, new monospaced font that includes programming ligatures and is designed to enhance the modern look and feel of the Windows Terminal"
} ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
{
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "IBM Plex Mono" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : true ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Blex Mono" ,
"folderName" : "IBMPlexMono" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "BlexMono Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : false ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "blex-mono" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "It's global, it's versatile and it's distinctly IBM"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Code New Roman" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "CodeNewRoman" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "CodeNewRoman" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "CodeNewRoman Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "code-new-roman" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "code-new-roman" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Tunable, slashed zeros, compact smaller characters"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "Cousine" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Cousine" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Cousine" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Cousine Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "cousine" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "cousine" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Similar to Courier New with better readablitiy, dotted zeros"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
{
"unpatchedName" : "DaddyTimeMono" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"patchedName" : "DaddyTimeMono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "DaddyTimeMono" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "DaddyTimeMono Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "daddytimemono" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "daddy-time-mono" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"description" : "A monospaced font for programmers and other terminal groupies"
} ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "DejaVu Sans Mono" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "DejaVuSansMono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "DejaVuSansMono" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "DejaVuSansMono Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "dejavu" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "dejavu-sans-mono" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Dotted zero, based on the Bitstream Vera Fonts with a wider range of character"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Droid Sans Mono" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "DroidSansMono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "DroidSansMono" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "DroidSansMono Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "droid-sans" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "droid-sans-mono" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Good for small screens or font sizes"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Fantasque Sans Mono" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "FantasqueSansMono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "FantasqueSansMono" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "FantasqueSansMono Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "fantasque-sans" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "fantasque-sans-mono" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "\"Wibbly-wobbly handwriting-like fuzziness\", takes some inspiration from Inconsolata and Monaco"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Fira Code" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "FiraCode" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "FiraCode" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "FiraCode Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "firacode" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "fira-code" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Programming ligatures, extension of Fira Mono font, enlarged operators"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
2022-11-25 17:47:12 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Fira" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "FiraMono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "FiraMono" ,
2023-01-30 08:55:58 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "FuraMono Nerd Font" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : "fira" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "fira-mono" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"description" : "Mozilla typeface, dotted zero"
} ,
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Go Mono" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Go-Mono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Go-Mono" ,
2023-01-30 08:55:58 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "GoMono Nerd Font" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : "go-mono" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "go-mono" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Created specifically for the Go project, looks particularly clear for use with the Go language"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "Gohu" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Gohu" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Gohu" ,
2023-01-30 08:55:58 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "GohuFont Nerd Font" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : false ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "gohufont" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Bitmap font, tall capitals and ascenders, small serifs"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "Hack" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Hack" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Hack" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Hack Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "hack" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "hack" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Dotted zero, short descenders, expands upon work done for Bitstream Vera & DejaVu, legible at common sizes"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "Hasklig" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : true ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Hasklug" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Hasklig" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Hasklug Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "hasklig" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "hasklug" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Monospaced ligatures, makes composite glyphs (e.g. ->) more reabable, especially in Haskell"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Heavy Data" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "HeavyData" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "HeavyData" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "HeavyData Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : false ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "heavy-data" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"description" : "Novel and unique design, dotted zero"
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "Hermit" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : true ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Hurmit" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Hermit" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Hurmit Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "hermit" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "hurmit" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Symbols stand out from common text"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
{
"unpatchedName" : "iA Writer" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : true ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"patchedName" : "iM Writing" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "iA-Writer" ,
2023-01-30 08:55:58 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "iMWritingMonoS Nerd Font" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : "ia-writer-mono" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "im-writing" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"description" : "A heavy modification of IBM's Plex font"
} ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
{
"unpatchedName" : "Inconsolata" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Inconsolata" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Inconsolata" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Inconsolata Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "inconsolata" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "inconsolata" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Slashed zero, takes inspiration from many different fonts and glyphs, subtle curves in lowercase"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "InconsolataGo" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "InconsolataGo" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "InconsolataGo" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "InconsolataGo Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : false ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "inconsolata-go" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"description" : "Inconsolata with straight quotes"
} ,
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Inconsolata LGC" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "InconsolataLGC" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "InconsolataLGC" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "InconsolataLGC Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : false ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "inconsolata-lgc" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"description" : "Inconsolata with added the Cyrillic alphabet"
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "Iosevka" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Iosevka" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Iosevka" ,
2023-04-05 16:02:47 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Iosevka Nerd Font" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : "iosevka" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "iosevka" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Narrow and horizontally tight characters, slashed zero"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
2023-04-05 16:02:47 +02:00
{
"unpatchedName" : "Iosevka Term" ,
"RFN" : false ,
"patchedName" : "IosevkaTerm" ,
"folderName" : "IosevkaTerm" ,
"imagePreviewFont" : "IosevkaTerm Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "false" ,
"caskName" : "iosevka-term" ,
"description" : "A narrower variant focusing terminal uses: Arrows and geometric symbols will be narrow to follow typical terminal usages"
} ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "JetBrains Mono" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"patchedName" : "JetBrainsMono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "JetBrainsMono" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "JetBrainsMono Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "jetbrainsmono" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "jetbrains-mono" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"description" : "JetBrains officially created font for developers"
} ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
{
"unpatchedName" : "Lekton" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Lekton" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Lekton" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Lekton Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "lekton" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "lekton" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Very light and thin characters, sharp m's, `0` and `O` very similar"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
2022-11-25 17:47:12 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Liberation" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : true ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "LiterationMono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "LiberationMono" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "LiterationMono Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "liberation" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "liberation" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"description" : "`0` and `O` very similar, very short tight descenders"
} ,
2022-08-20 17:05:25 +02:00
{
"unpatchedName" : "Lilex" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2022-08-20 17:05:25 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Lilex" ,
"folderName" : "Lilex" ,
"imagePreviewFont" : "Lilex Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "lilex" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "lilex" ,
2022-08-20 17:05:25 +02:00
"description" : "Modern with ligatures"
} ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
{
2022-11-29 15:49:55 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Meslo LG" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2022-11-29 15:49:55 +02:00
"patchedName" : "MesloLG" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Meslo" ,
2023-01-30 08:55:58 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "MesloLGM Nerd Font" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : "meslo" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "meslo-lg" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Slashed zeros, customized version of Apple's Menlo"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "Monofur" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Monofur" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Monofur" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Monofur Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "monofur" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "monofur" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Dotted zeros, slightly exaggerated curvy characters, compact characters"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "Monoid" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Monoid" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Monoid" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Monoid Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "monoid" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "monoid" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Ligatures, distinguishable glyphs with short ascenders & descenders, large operators & punctuation"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "Mononoki" ,
2023-01-17 14:28:27 +02:00
"RFN" : true ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Mononoki" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Mononoki" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Mononoki Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "mononoki" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "mononoki" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Keeps in mind differentiation of characters and resolution sizes"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "M+" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "MPlus" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "MPlus" ,
2023-01-30 08:55:58 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "M+ 1m" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : false ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "mplus" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"description" : "Multiple styles and weights, many glyph sets (e.g. Kana glyphs)"
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "Noto" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Noto" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Noto" ,
2023-01-30 08:55:58 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "NotoSansMono Nerd Font" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : "noto" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "noto" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"description" : "`0` and `O` very similar, characters are either very curvy or straight lined"
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "ProFont" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "ProFont" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "ProFont" ,
2023-01-30 08:55:58 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "ProFontIIx Nerd Font" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : "profont" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "profont" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Looks best with anti-aliasing turned off, squared off character corners, vertically tight small `s`"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
2022-11-25 17:47:12 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "ProggyCleanTT" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "ProggyClean" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "ProggyClean" ,
2023-01-30 08:55:58 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "ProggyCleanTT Nerd Font" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : "proggy-clean" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "proggy-clean-tt" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"description" : "Designed particularly for use at small point sizes"
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "OpenDyslexic" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "OpenDyslexic" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "OpenDyslexic" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "OpenDyslexic Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "opendyslexic" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "open-dyslexic" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Designed specifically to alleviate reading errors caused by dyslexia"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
{
"unpatchedName" : "Overpass" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Overpass" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Overpass" ,
2023-01-30 08:55:58 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "OverpassMono Nerd Font" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : "overpass" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "overpass" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"description" : "An open source font family inspired by Highway Gothic"
} ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Roboto Mono" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "RobotoMono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "RobotoMono" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "RobotoMono Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "roboto" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "roboto-mono" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Dashed zero, curved and straight character lines"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Share Tech Mono" ,
"RFN" : true ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "ShureTechMono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "ShareTechMono" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "ShureTechMono Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "share-tech" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "shure-tech-mono" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Dotted zeros, distinguishable 1 and l, curved and straight character lines"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Source Code Pro" ,
"RFN" : true ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"patchedName" : "SauceCodePro" ,
"folderName" : "SourceCodePro" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Sauce Code Pro Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "source-code-pro" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "sauce-code-pro" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"description" : "Monospaced font family for user interface and coding environments"
} ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Space Mono" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "SpaceMono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "SpaceMono" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "SpaceMono Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "space" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "space-mono" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"description" : "Squarish character lines, dotted zero, aggressive parethesis"
} ,
2021-12-11 23:35:07 +02:00
{
2022-11-25 17:47:12 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Symbols Only" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2022-12-19 18:10:38 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Symbols" ,
2021-12-11 23:35:07 +02:00
"folderName" : "NerdFontsSymbolsOnly" ,
2022-12-19 18:10:38 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Symbols Nerd Font Mono" ,
2021-12-11 23:35:07 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : false ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "symbols-only" ,
2022-12-19 18:10:38 +02:00
"description" : "Just the Nerd Font Icons. I.e Symbol font only"
2021-12-11 23:35:07 +02:00
} ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
{
"unpatchedName" : "Terminus" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : true ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Terminess" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Terminus" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "TerminessTTF Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "terminus" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "terminess-ttf" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"description" : "Squarish characters that are slightly askew"
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "Tinos" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Tinos" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Tinos" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Tinos Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : false ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "tinos" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"description" : "Some similarities to Times New Roman, designed by Steve Matteson, includes pan-European WGL character set"
} ,
{
"unpatchedName" : "Ubuntu" ,
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "Ubuntu" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "Ubuntu" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "Ubuntu Nerd Font" ,
2022-10-18 15:52:17 +02:00
"linkPreviewFont" : false ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "ubuntu" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Specially created for Ubuntu"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
} ,
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Ubuntu Mono" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"patchedName" : "UbuntuMono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "UbuntuMono" ,
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "UbuntuMono Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "ubuntu" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "ubuntu-mono" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Dotted zeros, used the `n`, `o`, `H` & `O` Latin characters as a base for design"
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
} ,
{
2022-11-26 13:50:39 +02:00
"unpatchedName" : "Victor Mono" ,
"RFN" : false ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"patchedName" : "VictorMono" ,
2021-11-26 16:46:46 +02:00
"folderName" : "VictorMono" ,
2020-04-06 10:01:32 +02:00
"imagePreviewFont" : "VictorMono Nerd Font" ,
"linkPreviewFont" : "victor-mono" ,
casks: Hardcode cask names in fonts.json
[why]
We want to replace the existing casks. But they do not have a consistent
way to name the casks. Sometimes blanks are preserved (as dashes):
"unpatchedName": "DejaVu Sans Mono",
"patchedName": "DejaVuSansMono",
"caskName": "dejavu-sans-mono",
The above looks like cask-name == unpatched-name.
Here they introduce blanks out of thin air (the original name does not
have blanks):
"unpatchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"patchedName": "DaddyTimeMono",
"caskName": "daddy-time-mono",
Here they add something to the name??!:
"unpatchedName": "Gohu",
"patchedName": "Gohu",
"caskName": "gohufont",
Here the cask-name follows the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Hasklig",
"patchedName": "Hasklug",
"caskName": "hasklug",
Here they do not follow the RFN renaming:
"unpatchedName": "Liberation",
"patchedName": "LiterationMono",
"caskName": "liberation",
And there are a lot more ... strangenesses.
I guess the casks have been created by different people following
different ideas.
[how]
All these inconsistencies makes setting up rules how to determine the
cask name from the other names very complicated and brittle.
If we want to preserve the existing cask names the simplest and most
stable approach is to explicitely specify them in the fonts.json
database:
Introduce a new data field "caskName", like shown above.
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
2022-11-26 19:00:17 +02:00
"caskName" : "victor-mono" ,
2022-10-18 19:12:20 +02:00
"description" : "Clean, crisp and narrow, with a large x-height and clear punctuation"
2019-10-12 20:59:13 +02:00
}
]
}