Re: Xonotic: gmqcc package review
On Sunday 29 September 2013 18:56:50 Anton Balashov wrote:
> So, the package becomes more clean and I hope to release it. Open
> * Should I make a patch for manpage?
Yes, but as Boris mentioned, see if it is already fixed upstream. A
note - you may want to have your upstream branch as a copy of upstream
git. This makes things easier when picking patches.
Also, this way git-buildpackage can auto generate your tarballs from
upstream tags, see the git-upstream-tag option - this would also
simplify the process of creating your tarbals even in the case you
want to use an arbitrary upstream commit as, AFAIK, you could place
the relevant tag onto the upstream branch (i.e. your copy of upstreams
> * What to do with dir "syntax"?
I think that these files should be packaged. Currently I see that
your source only builds one package. I would suggest you split the
syntax files into another package as a user of the compiler would not
necessarily want the syntax files (also, they are arch independent).
These files may be suitable to go into a -dev package, but I may be
wrong. Also, there is a .tex file doc/specification.tex that
describes the QuakeC language used by gmqcc. It would be great (but
not necessary) if this were compiled and put into a package too. It
could go into the same package as the syntax files.
> * Who will be able to became a sponsor for the package? It need for
> Xonotic (one of the best open FTS for Linix). Link for review .
Don't worry about this part yet.