Re: AstroMenace and wheezy-backports
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Boris Pek <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Hi team,
> We had a discussion with Dmitry. And now we need more opinions.
>>> What do you think, is it a good idea to prepare astromenace packages for
>> I doubt that based on cost-benefit analysis. :)
> I have doubts as well. That's why I am asking.
> BTW, which costs do you have in mind? From maintainer point of view: game does
> not depend on newest versions of libraries, so its backporting does not
> require much time.
I don't know much about astromenace specifically, but depending on the
pace of development upstream, the fact that the game doesn't depend on
newer versions of libraries, which are not available in wheezy, may
not hold true as wheezy ages.
>> As per "Basic Rules":
>> "Please only upload package with a noteable userbase. User request
>> for the package may be an indicator."
>> IMHO popcon=62 does not qualify for "notable userbase"...
> Yes, but this game is not available for wheezy users. Package was uploaded
> recently and its popularity is growing each day .
>> Besides they rarely ask for games to backport and I'm not sure if
>> backporting games is a common practice...
> Yes, I see very few games there .
>  http://tinyurl.com/mdmg8pm
>  http://packages.debian.org/wheezy-backports/games/
>  http://packages.debian.org/squeeze-backports/games/
> Any thoughts about usefulness/uselessness of astromenace game in the
> wheezy-backports are welcome.
My personal opinion is that if you are willing and capable of
maintaining (and testing, and providing support for) a backported
package for wheezy's lifetime, go for it. I believe that backports
provides a very useful service for stable users (hence why I've gone
through the trouble of backporting some of my packages, e.g. wesnoth
and supertuxkart), and I don't see why games are an exception.