[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: packaging sfxr

2008/11/18 Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@hhs.nl>:
> Richard Hartmann wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 07:56, Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> wrote:
>>> How about play@lists.freedesktop.org? There is already create@l.f.o.
>> I was planning to go for a more descriptive name like
>>  games-packaging@fdo
>>  packages-games@fdo
>>  cross-distro-packaging-games@fdo
>> etc. Yours has the advantage of being more emotional & fun, though.
>> Can you guys chip in and do a mini-vote thing? We already lost track
>> of this once so I am going to create the list soonish.
> I like the play@ I must admit.

what's wrong with games@ ?

>>> vcs-pkg.org was started for this very purpose.
>> It is a tad Debian- and git-centric (not saying that is bad, just noting
>> it), but this might be a good place to:
>> 1) keep common patchsets that can be applied over upstream
>> 2) create new upstream sites where original upstream is dead
> I believe 2 is the best to do, because then we don't need buy in from other
> distro's. They will sooner or later notice, or be noticed by their users
> that a new upstream release is out, that way we can share our work without
> having to actively push it. And who knows, people from all places including
> dyi builds of the games might go sending in patches.
> This also takes away some of the security concerns. As consuming an upstream
> tarbal with the risk of it containing something nasty is part of the usual
> processes for a distro.

It's OK for ma, but in that case, if we're gonna be upstream, it'll be
better to have a repository there too and not just some tarballs.


Reply to: