https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208835 --- Comment #6 from Alexander Ploumistos <alex.ploumistos@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Parag AN(पराग) from comment #5) > Many times upstream developers of fonts do not update meta information like > version number, License url, Copyright etc. in fonts also not release > versioned tarball. So best way to identify that upstream silently changed > the font file but not information we should add maximum identification to > the packaged font file. During these past few months, I noticed that upstream had changed the fonts, without altering the date or incrementing the version, so I wholeheartedly agree with you and as you can see, I have changed the naming on all the gdouros- font packages. > If you still think upstream is right in writing 7.15 then good to clarify > with him again but if he says its 7.15 but forgot to update then our package > naming is better 7.13-0.2.20150430 that will say that packaged font archive > is downloaded on 20150430 date and inside font information say 7.13 as also > archive tarball is not versioned and there is no information in other > supporting text files in that tarball. I have sent him a message, if and when he fixes the mismatch I will update the package. I am leaving it as 7.13-0.2.20150430 for now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review