On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Tomasz W. Kozlowski
You are responding to the bug based on reports that
come from outside the
Wikimedia universe -- and to say otherwise is untrue and absurd in itself.
You saw the feedback, Steven, with your own eyes, in January of this year:
was submitted by Wikipedian Patrick87 on January 8 at
You had almost three full months to deal with the problem, and yet you are
only responding to it when people pointed it out to you on Twitter, Reddit,
Quora, and wherever else.
/If/ you value feedback from Wikipedians, why don't you act on it?
We should be having this conversation in Bugzilla. I replied to this issue
TL;DR: one user saying they chose to download the fonts in question is not
the same thing as a report that a significant minority might have them.
On the general point: you and others seem to be simultaneously angry that
we tried a version without a freely-licensed font *and* that we have tried
versions which did have FOSS fonts, but that had unexpected bugs for some
Windows users. Which is it? Or is that you're just looking for an excuse to
be mad and cause a fuss because we changed the typography at all? It sounds
to me like it's the latter.
New software updates that reach this widely always have issues that come up
for unexpected edge cases. The preexisting defaults have been around a long
time, and gone through much bug fixing and tweaking based on user feedback
across wikis. The same will be necessary for the new typography as well.