Update M PLUS #1357
Merged
Update M PLUS #1357
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
They renamed
M Plus Code Latin -> M Plus Code Latin50
M Plus Code Latin Expanded -> M Plus Code Latin60
The versioning is rather divers, add more information into the font
specific README file.
Fixes: #1333
Reported-by: LeoniePhiline
Signed-off-by: Fini Jastrow <ulf.fini.jastrow@desy.de>
Finii
force-pushed
the
feature/Update-Mplus
branch
from
c95885a
to
1ef258d
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
They renamed
M Plus Code Latin -> M Plus Code Latin50
M Plus Code Latin Expanded -> M Plus Code Latin60
The versioning is rather divers, add more information into the font specific README file.
Fixes: #1333
Requirements / Checklist
What does this Pull Request (PR) do?
How should this be manually tested?
Any background context you can provide?
What are the relevant tickets (if any)?
Screenshots (if appropriate or helpful)
Our version versus HEAD version:
Renaming check: