[pkg] Can't easily use Ubuntu without using Ubuntu Mono

Not sure if it's related, but apparently firefox resp. launchpad is using different font since recently updated Oneiric, where previous is better to read. Since I don't make screenshots all the time from launchpad pages I attach one from Natty which shows how it was before in Oneiric to distinguish it from current Oneiric.

Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.

There's two sides to this and I would appreciate some guidance and which this bug report should focus on:

  (a) Installing Ubuntu proportional fonts (x7) and installing Ubuntu Mono fixed width fonts (x4) independently.

  (b) Being able to select which is used by the operating system.

for (a), this is a matter of packaging. They could be split out. For technical reasons it may be desirable to have one .deb package installed, but not the other; such as for saving disk space.

for (b), the two can be set independently. They are saved in the keys 'font-name' and 'monospace-font-name'. But default these are:

  echo {,monospace-}font-name | xargs -n1 gsettings get org.gnome.desktop.interface
  'Ubuntu 11'
  'Ubuntu Mono 13'

although the user is able to override the defaults for one without affecting the other.

The screenshot in comment #1 is from Launchpad, which hard-codes the "Ubuntu Mono" font name. (Look at the CSS for this page in Firebug as proof.) Changing the default Gnome monospace font, as mentioned in comment #5, won't do a thing regarding Launchpad's font choice.

(Perhaps this could be made a user profile option in Launchpad?)

This bug is unnecesarily vague, and I'm tempted to close it as "Invalid". The request for making Launchpad text bigger is bug 883258 (and also bug 918284). Go for them.

"Incomplete" is not for when developers don't know how they could or should fix a bug. It's for when the report is missing necessary information from someone experiencing the bug, and it should expire if that information isn't forthcoming. Paul and Fitoschido, please specify what extra information I need to provide. Thanks.

mpt: Comment #5 (which also set "Needs Information") requests clarification upon whether this bug should focus on remedying (a) or (b), or something else.

The original report is:

  I find the Ubuntu font fairly attractive. [Opinion]
  On the other hand, I find the Ubuntu Mono font unpleasant [Needs more detail about why it is unpleasant]
  and likely to slow down my work. [Opinion]
  I understand it is a matter of personal taste, [Fact]
  but the reasons should be obvious from the attached image. [Guesswork required; appears to be Launchpad]
  On popular operating systems, [Guesswork required; Mac OSX?]
  it is easy to use one font but not another, even if they are related. [Factual statement, I think]
  I suggest that this be possible on Ubuntu with the Ubuntu fonts too. [A recommendation; of which Comment #5 asks for clarification in narrowing down exactly the recommendation should be attached to; it is possible to set the keys on Ubuntu independently at a low level; and it would be possible…]
  Probably the simplest way of implementing this would be to package them separately. [Recommendation, …to do this]

For this is solely about generating multiple .debs from the source tarball; how should those be split for maximum useful (proportional in one, monos in another). Or common weights and less common weights; should Ubuntu Condensed be separate or with the main proportionals; should Light/Medium be included with those or packaged separately aswell).

All of these are /technically/ possible, but guidance would still be welcomed.

IMHO, this would be "Needs Information", but I'm happy to leave the status as New if that is likely to be better understood.

Paul, your questions had already been answered by Cody. But to reiterate, "(b) Being able to select which is used by the operating system" is not relevant to this bug report. The screenshot is not of an operating system component, or even of a Web page that asks for "monospace"; it is of a Web page that suggests fonts by name.

I have no opinion on whether weights should be packaged separately. All that is necessary to fix *this* bug is to package Ubuntu and Ubuntu Mono separately. There are other possible solutions (like implementing a font browser that lets you blacklist installed fonts), but as I suggested originally, packaging would be the simplest.

As "Ubuntu" (proportional) and "Ubuntu Mono" have different family names it would probably make sense to split the binary packages produced into two .debs built at the same time—this would allow installing one or the other. Doing this as a one-off would be painful, but it would be relatively quick (5–10 minutes to actually change ./debian/{control,*.install} and then an hour or two testing upgrade testing combinations) to split these at the point of doing the next release.

It makes sense to do this at the same time as bug #851457, as the rename to the New Debian Font Standard packaging names requires the same operations, and this would turn two rounds into a single round.