Remove duplicated fonts and put them under /fonts/

[mrego]

This patch removes the duplicated fonts we have in the repository
by copying them under /fonts/ and removing the duplicates.
The paths are updated accordingly to point to the new location.

In addition this patch moves the content of /css/fonts/ under /fonts/,
so there is a single common "fonts" folder on the repository.

[gsnedders]

I think I'd rather have each font in its own directory rather than putting lots directly in /fonts (so then we can have adjacent README files with something about the font, which most of them could do with!); not expecting you to document all of them /now/ though.

[gsnedders]

(I fat-fingered the wrong button there)

[w3c-bots]

Build ERRORED

Started: 2018-03-07 11:57:49
Finished: 2018-03-07 12:13:35

Failing Jobs

• firefox:nightly
• chrome:dev
• safari:11.0
• MicrosoftEdge:16.16299

View more information about this build on:

• WPT PR Status
• TravisCI

[gsnedders]

(The build failing is unsurprising given number of tests modified.)

[mrego]

@gsnedders what could be the structure of /fonts/ folder then, would it be something like this fine?

├── ad
│   └── AD.woff
├── adobe-fonts
│   ├── CSSFWOrientationTest.otf
│   ├── CSSHWOrientationTest.otf
│   ├── LICENSE
│   └── README.md
├── ahem-extra
│   ├── AHEM_*.TTF
├── Ahem.ttf
├── canvas-test
│   ├── CanvasTest.ttf
│   └── CanvasTest.ttf.sub.headers
├── CSSTest
│   ├── csstest-*.ttf
│   ├── LICENSE
│   └── README
├── gentiumplus-r
│   └── GentiumPlus-R.woff
├── math
│   ├── *.woff
├── mplus-1p-regular
│   └── mplus-1p-regular.woff
├── noto
│   ├── NotoSansAdlam-hinted
│   │   ├── LICENSE_OFL.txt
│   │   ├── NotoSansAdlam-Regular.ttf
│   │   └── README
│   ├── NotoSansCypriot-hinted
│   │   ├── LICENSE_OFL.txt
│   │   ├── NotoSansCypriot-Regular.ttf
│   │   └── README
│   └── NotoSansDeseret-Regular.ttf
├── OWNERS
├── README.md
├── revalia
│   └── Revalia.woff
├── sileot-webfont
│   └── sileot-webfont.woff
└── tcu-font
    └── tcu-font.woff

I'm asking before doing the actual changes on the patch, just in case you'd prefer something different.
Thanks.

[jgraham]

I don't really care how this is organised within /fonts but one subdirectory per font doesn't seem like an obvious default. I understand doing it for cases like Noto where we might group lots of similar fonts together.

[gsnedders]

Okay, I've moved CanvasTest back out of a directory (because it's a solo font) and reverted the changes that point to it. This should fix the update_built_tests check failing.

[gsnedders]

waiting for Travis to finish…

[plinss]

Having all the fonts being referred to using absolute paths is breaking the css test infrastructure as the URLs are no longer within the test built test suite...

[fantasai]

Please revert this change. This just broke way too much stuff. CSSWG test infrastructure is broken, running local tests while one is working is broken, and it's entirely likely that other systems pulling these tests are broken. There's a reason we use relative URLs. Maybe there's a better way, but at least if you're making a change don't break everything in the process.

[frivoal]

Also, the merge has invalidated all the manual testing results stored in testharness, since the files have changed :(

That doesn't mean we should never do any kind of sweeping change, but since it does cause data loss, we shouldn't do such changes lightly

[mrego]

Here is a PR to revert this until for now: #9940

I'm sorry for this being breaking the CSS infrastructure, but I'm not sure I understand the reasons.
Using relative paths has also issues with the CSS infrastructure if they are like ../foo/bar.baz,
however using absolute paths has been working fine for /resources/testharness.js
why that cannot be possible for /fonts/?

And about the manual testing results, I think that this kind of changes will only be needed once, so we'd need to assume that I guess we have no other choice.
And I guess we all agree that avoiding duplicated files in the repo is a good goal.

And my apologizes again for breaking this but it's not always easy to know what's going on in the CSS build system. 😞

[r12a]

Where does this leave us in terms of lodging copies of the CSS fonts under /fonts so that people can use them in that location in future? I'm hoping that that's still ok, since i recently changed several hundred tests (only a few submitted so far) to look in /fonts.

Note that I already started that process with #9818 (and i'm relying on that location for the 500 test PR at #9871).

[mrego]

I don't really know what we should do here, so I'll let other people with more experience to decide.

BTW, I did this PR after this comment:
#9689 (comment)
Note that there are currently a bunch of duplicated fonts in WPT, so it seemed a good idea to get rid of the duplicates.

[foolip]

On IRC: https://w3.logbot.info/testing/20180309#c384617

[foolip]

So, I'm ready to revert #9940 but am waiting for confirmation, so that we don't flip back and forth and create more trouble.

[plinss]

I don’t believe this needs to be reverted.

There’s a secondary problem that when tests are changed, the results posted to the older version no longer apply, and a lot of manual testing can be lost unnecessarily for changes like these. The CSS test harness has a mechanism where different versions of a test can be declared to equivalent (formerly used to allow certain meta data changes), this could be leveraged to reinstate the old results, but will take some work.

[foolip]

@Hexcles and I were talking about what it would take to avoid the need for urgent fixing of this sort going forward, and lints that enforce the constraints seem like the obvious way. @plinss, what's a good place to learn more about how the CSS test harness works? Are there other constraints apart from required spec links and what directories can be included from?

[mrego]

I'd be interested in knowing more about the CSS build system to check which are the requirements.
In my mind it seems it'd be nice to extend https://wpt.fyi to eventually replace https://test.csswg.org