On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 12:21:55PM +0700, Daniel Glassey wrote to debian-perl: > On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 11:47:25PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote: > > On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 22:33:39 +0000, Daniel Glassey wrote: > > > > > > > > I'm planning to package libfont-ttf-scripts-perl based on the > > > > > > existing > > > > > > packaging used in > > > > > > https://launchpad.net/~silnrsi/+archive/ubuntu/smith > > [..] > > > > Reviewed and some TODOs added (this time more than in > > > > libtext-unicode-equivalents-perl :)) to d/changelog. > > > Thanks. I think I've got most of those sorted now. > > > A couple of things to sort out (as long as the rest is ok!) > > > > This looks good, thanks. > > For the patches I suggest to add a few more headers (DEP3), > > especially the URLs of the upstream bugs. > > Done. > > > > > I hope the files installed into /usr/bin don't clash with anything, they > > > > all sound a bit generic > > > The installed scripts (addfont and addpath aren't installed) are: > > > add_classes, check_attach, dumpfont, fret, hackos2, make_fea, make_gdl, > > > make_volt, psfix, sfd2ap, sfdmeld, sfdmerge, ttf2volt, ttf2woff, > > > ttfascent, > > > ttfbboxfix, ttfbuilder, ttfdeflang, ttfeval, ttffeatparms, ttflang2tuner, > > > ttfname, ttfremap, ttfsetver, ttfsubset, ttftable, > > > typetuner, volt2ap, volt2ttf > > > > > > I've checked and those don't match the name of files in sid (searching on > > > packages.d.o). > > > > That's good. > > > > > add_classes, check_attach, psfix are the ones that sound generic to me. > > > Would it be worth it to rename them even if they don't currently clash? > > > Though that would mess up any system that expects to call them. > > > > Right, that's the problem. > > TBH, I'm a bit ambivalent -- what do others think? > > Any opinions anyone?
Hi, I'm preparing a perl package that installs the scripts add_classes, check_attach and psfix to /usr/bin. These do things related to fonts. The names sounds generic but they aren't being used by anything else in Debian. I could change them but then that would mess up anything that expects to call them. Any helpful thoughts on whether it is best to leave the names as they are? Daniel (not subscribed to debian-devel but please reply to the bug not me directly)
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
