Le Mer 28 février 2007 10:24, Jens Petersen a écrit : > So perhaps we need to set two naming conventions: using > "fonts-<language>" for standard international fonts and "<name>-fonts" > for alternative general fonts? fonts-foo are usually a mashup of fonts for a specific encoding, and foo-fonts fonts with distinct style that may span several languages areas. To be honest I'm not too fond of foo-font packages. They're a necessary 8-bit legacy stopgap, but I'd rather have vibrant font projects competing on quality and international coverage. You don't get that if you bundle different upstreams in neutraly named packages. (the fact that FC was more fonts-foo and FE foo-fonts reflects a rather utilitarian view of fonts RH-side, and the huge weight of the fossilized fonts sourced from xfree86/xorg) IMHO (which if worth what it's worth) you're not packaging generic fonts for tibetan but a specific font project, and it deserves name recognition just like any other upstream. So upstreamname-fonts seems more respectful for me. Also have you though of what will happen should someone want to package another tibetan font in a few months ? -- Nicolas Mailhot -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
