From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Enge Subject: Re: Font package naming convention Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2014 10:45:52 +0100 Message-ID: <20141101094552.GA30939@debian> References: <20141029221647.GA29707@debian> <87d29af24q.fsf@gmail.com> <20141030075640.GB27584@debian> <8738a5g1nh.fsf@gmail.com> <87ioj1sccx.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <87ppd9e6ah.fsf@gmail.com> <20141030191743.GB19999@debian.eduroam.u-bordeaux.fr> <878ujxdxmj.fsf@gmail.com> <20141031175840.GA16902@debian> <87fve3s1nl.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53799) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XkVGA-0002Hy-Fw for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Nov 2014 05:46:21 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XkVG3-0002DT-1B for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Nov 2014 05:46:14 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87fve3s1nl.fsf@gmail.com> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Alex Kost Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Alex, On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 12:36:30PM +0300, Alex Kost wrote: > I think the majority should decide. So if the most of guix people think > that it should be named "bar", then let it be so. for this we would need an "infrastructure": a social contract, a voting system and what else not, which seems a bit like overkill to decide on package names. Even debian does not hold general resolutions for the names of their packages... > However, I still think that having the following packages would be the > best: > ttf-bitstream-vera > ttf-dejavu > ttf-freefont > ttf-liberation > ttf-symbola Okay, could you please formulate your suggestion into a rule that we could follow for other font packages than these five? Andreas