Le vendredi 21 novembre 2008 à 12:28 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski a écrit : > On Friday, 21 November 2008 at 11:34, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > But anyway you're invited like everyone else on the list to review, > > comment on and complete the current font packaging guideline change > > proposal on > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation > > It looks mostly sane (I applied some grammar and punctuation fixes, I hope > you don't mind), Thank you for the review and the fixes, I don't mind at all, quite the contrary, you're very welcome. Please post any remarks you may have about the packages themselves, that's where the long-term value is. > but I don't like the naming of "rpm-fonts-filesystem". This > has nothing to do with rpm itself, hence it shouldn't look like a subpackage > of rpm. Instead, I suggest "fonts-filesystem". I fear that by the time I had written the macros, templates, specs, wiki pages, and all, my inspiration had quite dried out. I don't like rpm-fonts much, but I feel fonts would be too generic a name for the base package. If anyone has great naming ideas, I'm all ears. -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
_______________________________________________ Fedora-fonts-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
