-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Font Manager gives false duplicate font warnings. #59353
Comments
Adding to 6.5 but noting that this was was tested with GB trunk rather than with 6.5 beta 2. |
The reason for the error is because two of the font faces being uploaded (ExtraLight and Thin I believe) have the same weight value (250). Type/weight is how the client keeps typefaces unique. I'm not sure what else is different to make those to font faces unique but when the second of that pair is sent it isn't considered unique. |
It seems there is also some race conditions when uploading fonts with same type/weight. This could result in the same name in the list and not sure how it affects everything else.. The real question for me here is how a font can be different with same type and weight? Is it an alias or there could be more differences? If there are more differences, should they be taken into account on how we construct a unique id? |
Given that RC1 is today I'm removing this one from 6.5. |
Hi folks, |
Description
When uploading Noto Serif via the Font Managers uploads tab, I'm seeing false warning of duplicate fonts that are blocking uploads of some files.
I am unable to upload
NotoSerif-Thin
andNotoSerif-ThinItalic
as a result.The error I am seeing is:
I'm not really clear on what the error is referring too.
Step-by-step reproduction instructions
NotoSerif-
prefixScreenshots, screen recording, code snippet
Gif of upload process.
Note that I drag in 18 files but only 16 are imported.
Environment info
Please confirm that you have searched existing issues in the repo.
Yes
Please confirm that you have tested with all plugins deactivated except Gutenberg.
Yes
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: