Re: Bug#391691: Nexuiz needs a better description
On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 06:48:09PM +0100, Bruno Kleinert wrote:
> also the reference mentions "Avoid referring to other
> applications or frameworks that the user might not be
> familiar with"
I think this section (given the context) is intending to
avoid descriptions which _rely_ on the reader having heard
of a technology: mentioning quake can be achieved without
requiring the reader to have heard of it to understand the
description as a whole.
Having said that, could anyone playing or intending to play
an FPS not have heard of Quake?
> some people who don't like Quake 1, might like Nexuiz - if
> only they had installed it...
The suggestion that including a reference to quake would
cause people to pass nexuiz over is rather speculative,
whereas the suggestion that including the reference would
draw people has at least two people claiming that they did
exactly that (submitter and myself).
> there's no reason to mark nexuiz as "a better" or even
> "the best" game in comparison to other games!
Agreed: the sample description that the submitter provided
does this, but the bug itself doesn't request it, so don't
mark wontfix on this basis.
> sorry, but i'll tag this bug as wontfix.
I request that we discuss this further, so I'm CCing the
I hope that we'll get around do doing some work on
improving the amount of quake stuff in Debian at some
point. Having "apt-cache search quake" return nexuiz I
think would be a *good thing*.
Of course, debtags is a clean way of describing the
relationship of nexuiz to quake, but at present, that won't
help apt-cache results.
I need to look at the relationship of darkplaces to nexuiz
further. It would be nice to package a generic Quake engine
at some point. Does nexuiz patch darkplaces? Or is it just
a progs.dat / pak?.pak file, that could Depends: on a
quake-engine (like reedoom does with doom-engine)