Le jeudi 01 janvier 2009 à 21:09 +0200, Ville Skyttä a écrit :
On Tuesday 30 December 2008, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Sorry for hijacking the thread for something quite unrelated,
but for me
the "fontpackages" package name sounds pretty weird. I think similar
packages are usually called foo-common; was "fonts-common" ever considered?
I rather like the way it expands in nice self-explanatory
fontpackages-filesystem and fontpackages-devel binary packages. It has
some consistency with fontconfig (which felt strange at first when it
was introduced too).
Also, I'd rather avoid any name with the fonts- or -fonts affix as those
denote past and present font packages and this package has not fonts at
all inside it.
Anyway, the project was originally named rpmfonts, and then during
review people asked for a name change (various abandonned proposals:
fonts-rpm, fonts, etc). So it was already renamed once. Since the
package name translates in a fedorahosted project name, a FAS group
name, is used in the templates which have already been applied to more
than 30 packages, is used in wiki documentation, I'm not thrilled at the
idea of doing another renaming. But I will do it if people want to and
someone finds an awesome new name. I'm not convinced fonts-common is
such a name :p
Happy new year,