dm-upload-allowed for chocolate-doom
Hello,
There's a chocolate-doom package in SVN. We do not have
chocolate-doom in the archive, however, due to a problem
with virtual package dependencies[1], we have never uploaded
it to the archive.
I have thought of a solution for the dependency issue[2] and
so plan to have a chocolate-doom package soon, initially for
experimental.
Rumour has it that there will be a chocolate-doom upstream
release (the first for a while) in the very near future.
As part of sprucing up the packaging, I've added
DM-Upload-Allowed to the control file.
Here's my rough ordered plan for doom packages, to be
elaborated on:
round of new upstream releases and introduction of
chocolate-doom:
* new upstream prboom awaiting upload (now)
* freedoom svn packaged up without provides: field
* upload to experimental
* chocolate-doom packaged up
* upload to experimental
* new freedoom upstream release
* upload to sid
* chocolate doom now ready for sid
as part of transitioning the .desktop files away from doom
engines and towards doom-wads:
* prboom supplying "doom" alternative uploaded to sid
* freedoom with .desktop file can be uploaded to sid
* prboom removing .desktop file removed from sid
[1] chocolate-doom requires a doom IWAD (game data) to play.
We have installers for the original game data via
doom-package, and an open source IWAD called freedoom.
However, freedoom makes use of features that were
incorporated into doom engines sometime after the original
release and which chocolate-doom lacks. Therefore,
chocolate-doom does not work properly with freedoom.
Depends: doom-engine is therefore not suitable.
[2] The other doom engine in the archive is prboom, which
historically depends on freedoom | doom-wad. Therefore, if
we drop the provides: doom-wad from the freedoom package,
prboom will still pull it in if doom-wad is not available,
but chocolate-doom's dependencies will no longer be
satisfied by freedoom. So chocolate-doom is suitable for sid
once a freedoom package with that change enters.
--
Jon Dowland
Reply to: