From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
Subject: Re: Font package naming convention
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2014 18:49:35 +0100
Message-ID: <20141102174935.GF6865@debian>
References: <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>
	<87sii4q64v.fsf@gnu.org> <20141101095205.GB30939@debian>
	<87ioixo71g.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41330)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1XkzHe-0006yM-JY
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Nov 2014 12:49:54 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1XkzHW-00080b-Rc
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Nov 2014 12:49:46 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87ioixo71g.fsf@gnu.org>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=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: Ludovic =?iso-8859-15?Q?Court=E8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com>

On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 06:18:19PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Some of the fonts created by foundries are often referred to it using
> the foundry’s name, such as “Bitstream Vera”; there are also
> counter-examples, like Gentium, Charis, etc. (by SIL.)
> 
> So, again very informally, I would suggest to use the foundry name in
> cases where people expect to see it, and in cases where it removes
> ambiguity with similarly-named fonts.
> 
> What do people think?

I think it would be nice to add the foundry when it is know, such as
sil-gentium etc.; personally I find it an interesting information to have
(we would get a complete list of all packages sil fonts, for instance).

Andreas