Re: Fedora 11 font package changes proposal (renames, splits, etc)

Le dimanche 09 novembre 2008 à 16:42 +0200, Muayyad AlSadi a écrit : I suppose that if kacst lets arabeyes distribute them they are not unfriendly with each other. Open Font Library likewise only re-distributes other people work, I guess the prefix in this case would mainly be there to denote some sort of oflb or arabeyes editorial work Anyway, duly noted, if more people feel karcst should not be prefixed I guess we'll make it and exception (but I'd love to have a clear simple common sense naming rule). Some (but not all) of those fonts are currently in review: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461139 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462711 You can either work with the current would-be packager (and become co-maintainer) or submit a competing proposal (some reviews never go anywhere, unfortunately, don't wait for others to do the stuff you care about). The path to get a font in Fedora is documented there: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle We mostly ask packagers to adhere as closely as possible to the official spec template, create a wiki page that can be referenced in release notes, and avoid bundling different fonts in a single package. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Annotated_fonts_spec_template When there is little deviation from guidelines reviews tend to be quick (unfortunately the reverse is also true) New font packagers are always welcome! Your spec is not acceptable as-is, but if you're motivated I think you'll find creating guidelines-conformant spec files is not too hard. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot