Re: naming scheme for fonts packages?

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 <at> redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list