Am 02.09.2015 um 11:02 schrieb Alexandre Detiste: >> Le mardi 1 septembre 2015, 22:50:57 Markus Koschany a écrit : [...] >> I think it is more interesting to write documentation, articles and >> guides about the bigger picture. > > Yes... but I've read this [2], and I think the "Apparently we haven't found this consensus yet." is still valid; > for me a free engine without free-data is useless in main & should go to contrib > (that includes residualvm, maybe rbdoom3bfg...) > > [2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-games/2014/02/msg00086.html > > If we can at least come up with a basic description of the situation > that includes what is considered common knoweledge on d-d-games > and everyone agrees on that'll be a good start ! Hi, I think there is a misunderstanding here. I was simply stating that if you intend to create a homepage for g-d-p, you have basically two choices. To concentrate on the tool itself and to promote it by writing good documentation. Or you can expand the homepage by writing about "why do we need g-d-p in the first place? Why are there multiple doom or quake engines? How can I successfully play the games? Are there any walkthrough guides? Are there any alternatives? Is it possible to create data for those games? How can it be done? How can I contact the developers? etc. pp." This has absolutely nothing to do with the main vs. contrib discussion one year ago. It was just a general idea how one can improve the page rank of every homepage related to this topic. But to answer your questions we have reached a consensus back then. The quintessence was: https://wiki.debian.org/Games/Policy#guidelines_for_packaging_game_engines "Based on the precedent of quakespasm, the line currently drawn by the ftpmasters is that engines as cube2 or quakespasm can go in main without Free data also being in main, as long as usable Free data exists." Regards, Markus
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature