Preparing v0.13.0a0 pre-release

[felipesanches]

v0.13.0a0 (2024-Sep-13)

Noteworthy code-changes

• Profile owners, please take a look at the pending_review lists in your profile definitions. If you move them to exclude_checks it means you do not want the check in your profile. If you just remove from pending_review, then the check becomes effective in your profile. And if you do nothing, the checks still not reviewed will continue being automatically excluded from your profile.
• This release adopts a new naming scheme for checks. We had reports of users getting confused by the meaning of the reverse domain names included as prefixes of check-IDs, such as com.google.fonts. The real meaning was that the organization identified by such domain was the first contributor of a given check implementation. But some users were confused thinking that it mean the check belong to that organization's vendor-specific profile.
• Now profiles do not include that reverse domain prefix. And do not also have the "/check/" keywork anymore. As an example, com.google.fonts/check/tabular_kerning (on the Universal profile) is now simply called tabular_kerning
• Also, there's been a large number of checks migrated among profiles. Mosly towards the Universal one.
• The checks themselves also moved around in the code-repository, in an attempt to remove any resemblance of profile allocation within the /Lib/fontbakery/checks/ directory, which should be seen as a general pool of check implementations. As much as possible, profile definition should happen inside /Lib/fontbakery/profiles instead.
• The exception to this are the checks that are surely vendor-specific. All those were placed in sub-directories inside Lib/fontbakery/checks/, such as Lib/fontbakery/checks/vendorspecific/microsoft/.
• As this is the "a0" pre-release, there may be additional migrations and renames of checks, before we make an actual v0.13.0 release. Please open an issue if you have suggestions of better names or better profile allocations.

[guidoferreyra]

hi @felipesanches just to undertand better what I need to do. I’m a bit confused with the checks listed under pending_review there are some that I recongnized I had commented out on the previous profile but in general how did you make the list?

[felipesanches]

hi @felipesanches just to undertand better what I need to do. I’m a bit confused with the checks listed under pending_review there are some that I recongnized I had commented out on the previous profile but in general how did you make the list?

Sorry about the late reply. I've inspected the files with the definitions for each of the profiles and I used some logical inference to make by best effort in determining which checks would potentially be useful for each vendor. There were comments left by profile owners and other clues that helped me on those decisions.

For instance, I considered that whenever a profile included the entirety of googlefonts by default (using the "include_profile" field), it meant that the checks migrated from googlefonts to universal would not need to be reviewed by that profile owner (because those checks were already being automatically included, so would probably already be considered good). But for profiles that did not include googlefonts, the new checks migrated to universal profile would necessarily need to be reviewed first, so those were added to the "pending_review" list. And there were also similar cases for checks migrating among other profiles, for which I used similar logical reasoning.

I hope this clarifies the matter for you and I'll be glad to answer any additional questions you may still have about it.

[MariannaPaszkowska]

Hi, @felipesanches do you have a target date for a release including those changes?

[felipesanches]

Hi, @felipesanches do you have a target date for a release including those changes?

I'm planning a v0.13.0a5 pre-release later today and then, possibly, a final stable release next week (Nov 15, maybe).