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

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
> questions:
> 
> * 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 
tree).

> * 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 [3].

Don't worry about this part yet.

David


Reply to: