On 05/06/2011 12:58 AM, Christian PERRIER wrote: > This should be considered only when there is a need to make it > clear that fonts belong to a same "family" or origin. Doesn't the term "family" already have specific meaning in font-land? For example, I think of Libertine as a family, consisting of Libertine Normal, Libertine Bold, Libertine Condensed, Libertine Italic, etc. So i would hesitate to overload the term to also mean "fonts from a given origin", since it's not hard to find two fonts from the same foundry that aren't "familiar" in this sense. So that leaves "fonts from a given origin" as the only rationale for incuding the foundry in the name -- but as pabs pointed out, we don't generally include the origin of other software in the package name (e.g. GNU coreutils is just coreutils) unless a disambiguation among alternatives is needed (e.g. netcat-*). So *my* innate conservatism says: "why should fonts be any different?" We should keep the package naming conventions simple and consistent with the rest of the archive. Regards, --dkg
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature