Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
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.
Then a followup question: if there is only 1 (truetype) font in a font
package should the package name be "upstreamname-fonts" or
"upstreamname-font"? :)
The latter seems semantically more logical, the former more
syntactically consistent. It is easy to search for /most/ fonts
packages now with "rpm -qa '*fonts*'", but on the other hand it is a bit
strange to call something *-fonts if it only contains a single font? So
which gives? :)
Any comments on this?
Thanks, Jens
ps I guess another aspect is one can never be sure that a project with
one font now, in the future will not have more than one, or vice versa
even. (Debian uses package names like "ttf-name" for truetype fonts.)
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
