Quoting Jaldhar H. Vyas ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > >Let's write a fontpackages sub-policy instead, and let it up to the > >people to decide how they want to maintain their packages. > > > > Christian, I have to agree with Daniel here. We don't really need joint > maintenance but coordination on font policy would be a good idea. (Also if > someone could explain just how the heck defoma is supposed to work...)
I actually have no intent to enforce this to people who prefer maintaining the package they maintain alone. My current view is more having a common place for package maintenance (for maintainers who want to join), possibly with "sub-places" for packages which have joined this "loose team". There, each package maintainer would have to choice to either be the only responsible person for the package (aka be "Maintainer" and "Uploader" alone)....or give precedence to the team...or whatever combination. Again, no enforcement for anyone to join the team and the packaging policy would then be more a set of guidelines rather than an enforced policy such as other packaging policies. As you mention, Jaldhar, there are a few things related to font packaging which are not obvious to people who package fonts. "defoma" is among these....and fontforge os probably another one. So the team could also be a good place for font maintainers to share their experience and maybe also benefit from a wider experience by epople who have a good knowledge of such deep technical stuff. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
