[Pkg-fonts-devel] fonts-arkpandora: Re: Claiming the ownership as part of pkg-fonts

Fabian Greffrath fabian at greffrath.com
Thu Aug 22 07:56:40 UTC 2013

Hey Vasudev,

Am Donnerstag, den 22.08.2013, 11:39 +0530 schrieb Vasudev Kamath: 
> 1. Source package named in same way as upstream
> 2. Only binary package will be named to have fonts- prefix

I am against this for two reasons:

1) Upstream names may vary greatly. For the font at hand the upstream
tarball is even called ttf-arkpandora, which is the exact name that we
decided against in the font package naming policy. Following upstreams
potentially random naming decisions would negotiate the *ordering* of
binary package names - that we aimed for by introducing the font package
naming policy - on the source package level.

2) For source packages that only build one binary package, I generally
consider it best practise that both have the same name. Since we already
have a policy for the name of the binary package, IMHO the source
package name should be made to follow.

> I'm okay with last 2 changes but not the changes related to CDBS I
> will fix this myself. Also if you see having same name as upstream
> name for source package I'm okay with your changes.

I agree packaging style is a personal choice. If you fixed the typo in
copyright and the installation of the fontconfig file, I'll be
satisfied. ;)

> Sorry for late reply as I was travelling and was not having internet connection.

Never mind, nice to hear from you!



More information about the Pkg-fonts-devel mailing list