Hi, On 16.01.2015 14:48, Dmitry Yu Okunev wrote: > Hello. > > Is it really necessary to discuss this on debian-devel@? IMHO, it's > local issue, yet… And also please sorry for my English skills. You are welcome to discuss this game on our dedicated Debian Games mailing list, debian-devel-games@lists.debian.org, too. All ITP bug reports are automatically CCed to debian-devel, so that you can get some feedback for your package. [...] > 2 packages for 20 years is not too much. Why this should be stopped? > It's a part of history. This game represents very loud, long and > interesting moment in FOSS history. And it represents an essential > culture subset of nowadays FOSS community. So Debian will be better for > this people. If there's nobody from DD will agree with it, then the > package just won't be sponsored. I don't see any problem. > > How does XBill make Debian better? The question is rather what are the improvements and features of xlennart that would justify the inclusion of another almost identical package? XBill has been included in Debian since 1996 (the game itself is even older and was created in 1994) and it is one of the oldest games that are still maintained by the Debian Games team. I guess we still do that because of historical reasons and more importantly because the package does not require much maintenance. Back in 1996 there were only a few free software games, so naturally people packaged everything they could get hold of. Nowadays everything has fundamentally changed. Now there are a lot of excellent and complex free software games and nobody talks about the competition between Windows and Linux anymore. It's a relict of the past, just as the systemd debate will be a relict of the past in 20 years. If you are generally interested in packaging or maintaining existing games, please check out https://wiki.debian.org/Games/Development#Get_Involved My personal opinion is that both XBill and xlennart are mildly entertaining and it is rather immature to depict living people as a "virus". The message is either silly or offensive. >> I'd also object on the technical grounds that we already have xbill and >> the changes in xlennart don't truly justify a fork. > > This could be easily solved by merging xbill with xlennart to "xperson" > with collection of this people (bill and lennart). I absolutely agree with Ben here. I don't see anything special that would justify a fork. However, perhaps you might want to ask the upstream author of XBill to incorporate your changes and thus create a more customizable game. xbill.org is still online. Regards, Markus
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature