Harshula, le Tue 10 Apr 2012 11:40:59 +1000, a écrit : > On Mon, 2012-04-09 at 20:06 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > > There is already a libotf in debian, for handling OpenType Font. What > > I intend to do is renaming the so to allow co-installation, but > > keep development file names as is and use a conflict between -dev > > packages. Does it sound OK? > > OTF is an established acronym for OpenType Fonts.
And OTF is an established acronym for Open Trace Format. Worse, it's the filename extension. > It's unfortunate that Open Trace Format uses the phrase OTF. It's unfortunate that OpenType Font uses the phrase OTF. > Would they consider renaming? I don't think they would, it's relatively old (2005) and known already. > Emacs depends on libotf0. And thus my mentioning âWhat I intend to do is renaming the so to allow co-installationâ in the ITP. > I guess the question is, do you think someone wanting to use the > existing libotf-dev might also want to use Open Trace Format's dev > package? Such program can not exist yet, simply because upstreams already conflict anyway. We do not actually invent a conflict here, it already exists. Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
