Alegreya

[Thra11]

Motivation for this change

Package a couple of really nice fonts

Things done

• Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS linux)
• Built on platform(s)
  • NixOS
  • macOS
  • other Linux distributions
• Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
• Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"
• Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
• Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
• Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

[puzzlewolf]

Thanks for packaging these amazing fonts, I didn't know them before 😄

During review of my own fonts package #83537, it came up that mkDerivation should be used to create font derivations, instead of fetchzip.
Using fetchzip directly has the disadvantage that it makes it impossible to override these derivations with <font>.overrideAttrs. Also, it's odd to use fetchzip but override the builtin unpacking :)

[Thra11]

Thanks for the heads up! I'll change it to use mkDerivation.

[Thra11]

I wonder if we could write a section about packaging fonts in the manual. I looked there for guidelines on packaging fonts before copying an existing package. Other questions I would have liked answers to:

• Should font variants be packaged individually or together (common to have serif and sans versions, as in this PR) (Perhaps they should even be grouped by foundry?)
• Where multiple formats are available (e.g. otf, ttf, woff), should we choose a format or package all of them? If the latter, should they all be in a single package? or separated into fontname-ttf, fontname-otf, etc.?
• What should the package name be? Just the font name? fontname-font? fontname-tff?
• Any guidelines on what makes a font a good candidate for inclusion in nixpkgs. Only a tiny percentage of fonts are packaged at the moment, but I assume we don't want to package every font we can find.

I don't have any strong opinions on any of these issues. I just want to be able to follow some guidelines. I think guidelines make new contributors feel more confident, and thus more welcome (when you start a new job, it's nice to be told exactly what to do: you don't want to be left wondering whether you're doing the right thing).

[Thra11]

The other thing I wanted to know:

• Whether it's ok to not have a version, given that many fonts don't publish a version number.

[puzzlewolf]

Yes, I would have liked such a chapter too!

Do you mind posting at https://discourse.nixos.org/ to make this discussion more visible?

[nixos-discourse]

This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there:

https://discourse.nixos.org/t/guidelines-on-packaging-fonts/7683/1

[Thra11]

Things changed:

• replaced fetchzip with mkDerivation
• now fetches from the foundry's github repo instead of their website
• which means it now has a proper version

[Thra11]

/marvin opt-in
/status needs_reviewer

[marvin-mk2]

Hi! I'm an experimental bot. My goal is to guide this PR through its stages, hopefully ending with a merge. You can read up on the usage here.

[puzzlewolf]

LGTM, the nitpick is a matter of taste :)

[puzzlewolf]

/status needs_merger