[Pkg-fonts-devel] "foundry" part is ? (Re: Font packages renaming mini-HOWTO?)

Christian PERRIER bubulle at debian.org
Sun Jun 19 05:09:47 UTC 2011

Quoting Hideki Yamane (henrich at debian.or.jp):
> Hi all,
> On Thu, 5 May 2011 06:28:43 +0200
> Christian PERRIER <bubulle at debian.org> wrote:
> > This is good as I think we reached some kind of consensus with last
> > proposals, assuming the "foundry" part is considered to be optional.
>  Any conclusion?
>   a. to be optional
>   b. should not be present at all unless there are multiple packages with the same name
>   c. other

I'd vote for a., as a "should"

Something like "When a foundry or font author provides several fonts
that are packaged separately, package names should include the
foundry (or author's) name before the font name:

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-fonts-devel/attachments/20110619/2fe8c4aa/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Pkg-fonts-devel mailing list