[Pkg-fonts-devel] package names

[Paul Wise]

On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 6:43 AM, Bobby de Vos wrote:

> NRSI is preparing an update to a group of fonts called Gentium Plus.
> Ideally, what should be the package name? I ask since the conclusion
> will apply to some new fonts, not currently packaged in Debian.
>
>  1. fonts-sil-gentium-plus

I would go with this one, it includes the foundry and separates words
with a dash.

Also see our packaging policy:

https://wiki.debian.org/Fonts/PackagingPolicy
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/users/rbrito-guest/fonts-policy.git/tree/fonts_policy.mdwn
https://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-fonts/people/yosch/debian-font-packaging-policy.txt?view=markup

> The group of fonts will also include fonts called Gentium Book Plus, all
> in one upstream tar.xz file. Should there be one source package that
> produced two .deb files, one for Gentium Plus and the other for Gentium
> Book Plus?

If the binary fonts are large then that is probably useful, otherwise
probably not.

> Some NRSI fonts have the name of the bigger organization (SIL) as part
> of the font name, such as Charis SIL. The Debian package for this font
> is fonts-sil-charis. Is that a good pattern to continue (that is,
> dropping the sil since sil is the foundry name, or should the package
> ideally be called fonts-sil-charissil)? These conclusions will help me
> package newer fonts to be consistent with Debian.

For fonts, the Debian package names have no particular significance
wrt mapping between font names and packages so it doesn't matter much.
Dropping the second foundry name does make the package name more
aesthetically pleasing and less likely to annoy repetition pedants.

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise