Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477479 Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mail...@laposte.net> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(nicolas.mail...@l | |aposte.net) | --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mail...@laposte.net> 2009-01-07 04:23:27 EDT --- Those other pages that were approved yesterday by FPC (minutes not posted yet) may also be relevant for VLGothic http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_(2008-12-21) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2008-12-22) You probably want to perform the naming changes at the same time. To change a srpm naming, the current procedure is to orphan the old package in rawhide, and post a review request with the new name (I'll approve it as a matter of course if you do so) This will be discussed this evening by FESCO, you may want to add some input here http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/RenamingPackages As for the upgrade path, you have two choices: 1. If there is a clear mapping between the old packages and the new packages, use obsoletes inside the packages 2. If there is not use a compat package to garbage collect the old packages as has been done for dejavu in rawhide -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list