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

Re: Mass bug filing / call for testing: dependencies on SDL 1.2



On Wed, 21 Jun 2023 10:33:01 +0100, Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jun 2023 at 08:50:30 +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 17:24:03 +0100, Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>
> > wrote:  
> > > SDL 1.2 was superseded by SDL 2 several years ago, and no longer
> > > receives upstream maintenance or releases. Maintained software that
> > > uses SDL 1.2 should be ported to SDL 2.  
> > 
> > Given the time scales involved, is it worth waiting for SDL 3 (soon...)
> > before porting SDL 1.2 software? I’m assuming that SDL 3 will be available
> > for Trixie, and this would avoid two porting efforts.  
> 
> I don't know what the timescale for a stable release of SDL 3 is like -
> I hope it'll be ready before trixie, but I can't guarantee anything. Many
> games will not be able to move to SDL 3 until additional libraries like
> SDL2_image have a SDL 3 version, so even after everything is API-stable,
> it's going to take several trips through NEW before we can ask maintainers
> to port to it.
> 
> The first step in porting from SDL 1.2 to SDL 3 will be porting to SDL 2
> (both the core library and the version of addons like SDL_image), and
> the second step would be moving away from any deprecated SDL-2-era APIs,
> so I think it's worth doing those regardless.

Right, so in any case the effort involved in porting to SDL 2 won’t be
“wasted” by a subsequent port to SDL 3.

> What I would prefer to try to avoid here is for maintainers to think
> "I'll just wait for SDL 3", and then time passes, maintainers are busy
> with something else, we freeze, and we have to ship trixie with *three*
> major versions of SDL (or at least their -compat equivalents).
> 
> Ideally these bugs would have been opened in 2013 or 2014, but better late
> than never. (I was not involved in SDL maintenance at that point.)

Indeed!

Regards,

Stephen

Attachment: pgpw3ixx_MjKE.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: