In this process, we need to use birdfont to complete this final step. - Source: dev.to / about 2 months ago

All I what I saw are premium software. The only software I found at the lowest price is (FontBird)[https://birdfont.org/] = $10. But I don't know, I downloaded the free version (which doesn't support color fonts) and it seems to me that the software is not maintained well or glitchy! Source: over 1 year ago

FontForge is the best free font editor right now, although there are some others in development. A great place to start learning is to read the Design with FontForge ebook, which will quickly teach you a lot of the basics that can be applied no matter which font editing software you're using. If you're struggling with FontForge, you can also try BirdFont which is a bit simpler. Source: about 2 years ago

Besides, for adding the ligatures I use Birdfont for Linux. Source: about 2 years ago

More seriously, not really. Well maybe you can try Birdfont but usually FontForge is regarded as the most complete free editor. Birdfont looks more simple so it might work for you, I don’t know much about it. Source: over 2 years ago

Reviewable.io — Code review for GitHub repositories, free for public or personal repos. - Source: dev.to / 5 months ago

Yep, I agree! I work at, and use, Reviewable (https://reviewable.io) and we're the best way to review code on GitHub because we've focused on making the whole process better at every step. We've improved diffing, not only for large files (we support larger files than GitHub does) but also for understanding that diff. Have you ever reviewed a PR twice, but the second time around all your comments are gone and you... - Source: Hacker News / 10 months ago

Https://reviewable.io is the earliest full-powered Critique alternative for GitHub. It supports some cool things Critique doesn't/didn't, such as reviewing multi-commit branches (also across history-rewriting force-push cleanups), and indicating exactly the nature of your comment (just FYI, or you want this to be changed before you'll give your approval). (I was an intern in the initial making of Critique, and... - Source: Hacker News / 11 months ago

The linux kernel, which is open source and does want contributors, is doing more-or-less just fine with an email-based PR and review flow. If it's an open source project, it should be using an open source review platform that allows improvements and specialization of the code hosting too. Using github, where the review tools are bad and can't be improved by an outsider, is a slap in the face to open source.... - Source: Hacker News / 12 months ago

>See reviewer presence so that you can see if someone is already reviewing and avoid unnecessary pings. >Visibly values privacy and security above all else These two things seem squarely at odds. Personally, I don't want my code review tool announcing to developers when I'm looking at their PR. The fact that it's a Chrome extension would also be a big blocker for me. I run a dev team, and I wouldn't... - Source: Hacker News / about 1 year ago