Hi all, Whilst preparing chocolate-doom for upload, I realised a glaring issue with the current use of the doom-wad virtual package. doom-wad is currently used to specify an IWAD, and is provided by freedoom in main. However. freedoom is a "boom compatible IWAD" and cannot be played by anything that lacks boom support. (boom was a derivation of doom which added new features and became somewhat of a standard). This has not been a problem with the three engines in main so far (lxdoom, prboom, doom-legacy) because they've all had boom support. But chocolate-doom and jdoom (external to debian still atm) do not. I don't know if EDGE does or not, another engine external to debian, it does not appear to. Upstream for jdoom are implementing boom support but it is a design criteria of chocolate-doom to _not_ differ from the original doom wherever possible. We therefore need a pair of virtual packages. I propose doom-wad is kept and used to mean "a vanilla-doom compatible IWAD" and a new boom-wad virtual package is added to describe an IWAD which requires boom. This would require the following changes: prboom changed so that Depends: freedoom | doom-wad | boom-wad lxdoom also. I/we need to talk to Joe Drew about lxdoom. It's not a games-team package atm, it could be, but afaik it is pretty much supersceded by prboom upstream. freedoom changed so it Provides: boom-wad no changes to doom-wad-shareware (not a games-team package) no changes to chocolate-doom, edge, jdoom I'd also have to set Conflicts: so that packages were upgraded lock-step. Any objections? I'll implement the changes and build new packages, and update doom-packaging with the new guidelines within the next few days. -- Jon Dowland
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature