On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 01:09:57PM +0200, Sarantis Paskalis wrote: > Hello, > > Now, the draft for font naming guidelines suggests the srpm name to > changed from tetex-font-cm-lgc to ctan-cm-lgc-fonts (to which I agree). Looks good to me too. > The reason for this email is the last line in the proposed table, where > the TeX related subpackage is to be named ctan-cm-lgc-tex. I think this > is inconsistent with the rest of the TeX world in fedora and would like > some feedback as to what name would be preferable. I would personally prefer tex-cm-lgc for the TeX specific stuff. It is not consistent with the srpm name but it is consistent with the upstream (CTAN) package name, and it seems to me that it would be more consistent with non font tex pacakge names, and easier for user if it is called that way instead of ctan-cm-lgc-tex, or ctan-cm-lgc-fonts-tex. tex-cm-lgc-fonts would also be possible, but I would prefer using simply the CTAN package name. Unfortunatly, in that case, the .sty is called cmlgc.sty and not cm-lgc.sty, but it is still closer to the package name. Also there may be TeX packages that also have fonts, but consist mainly in tex stuff, in that case, I think that the srpm could be called tex-some-package though the font parts should still be called ctan-some-package-fonts-common ctan-some-package-fonts-roman ... -- Pat -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
