[Fedora-packaging] fontname-fonts or fonts-fontname?

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le samedi 04 février 2006 à 01:07 +0100, Dawid Gajownik a écrit :
> Hi!
> 
> Houston, we've got a problem ;)
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179439#c7
> 
> Do we have any naming guidelines concerning packages with fonts? There 
> is some inconsistency:

Nothing new, the "problem" was discussed when vera got in fedora.us and
then again when it was merged upstream (you can look up the bugzilla
entries/ ML threads)

FC tends to put fonts- first except when it's a subpackage. This helps
when you do a stupid sort (but in the days of autodep resolvers the use
of basic sort is somehow limited - tools are smarter nowadays)

(Note this is a new rule, for a very long time RHL/FC didn't have any
particular rule)

FE (and yes I have my share of responsibility there) tends to put -fonts
last as its more consistent with english, FC font subpackages and
external repositories (in the vera case bistream-vera-fonts already
existed in the helix gnome repo)

My own take is live and let live, the benefits of harmonising are not
worth the renaming pains.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20060204/33201f65/attachment.sig>