2012/5/13 Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx>: > Hi, > > > On 05/12/2012 07:15 PM, Nelson Marques wrote: >> >> 2012/5/12 Hans de Goede<hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > <snip> > > >>> First of all, welcome to the Fedora Games mailinglist, and let me say >>> that >>> we would love to have Unknown Horizons in Fedora. >>> >>> You mentioned a review request for UH that you closed, which I indeed >>> found: >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=718430 >>> >>> That review request points to this (recently fixed) FIFE bug: >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757352 >>> >>> But AFAIK there is no new review request for UH, did I miss it? >> >> >> I'm going to re-open it (the one you mentioned before) once we have >> all the dependencies prepared, let go a bit further: >> >> 1. Tom (spot) has updated the dependencies required to update ENet >> (libenet), which provides the base layer for multiplayer. With ENet >> updated, I can continue with my review request for 'python-enet' which >> provides the python bindings used by UH for Multiplayer. >> >> 2. FIFE - The packaging of FIFE isn't really as I would like to be. >> I'm gathering soon with FIFE upstream to propose a packaging model >> that upstream can support and hopefully to implement it on the next >> release in Fedora (and openSUSE); >> > > Ok. > > >> 3. Guichan - a dependency to build FIFE; This probably the only >> blocker as we need to submit a patch which was previously submited to >> upstream, but no action was taken on it and upstream from guichan >> seems to be masturbating themselves with UTF-8 implementation over the >> last 2 years but no real release was made. I'm going to propose this >> patch to Fedora guichan, which I don't mind also to co-maintain. If >> guichan doesn't fix this, we're (UH upstream) prepared to fork guichan >> so we don't have to strugle with vendors who can distribute UH. > > > As long as the patch does not change the API (extending it is ok), > then that should not be a problem. http://gitorious.org/guichan/mainline/commit/90c8966f6cb153d6ab03e146d3ade33a03b94bdc The patch was commited upstream, it's a simple 1 liner, but no release was issued after it... So when a release happens we can drop it; Now... I don't see why we can't add this patch. > > >>> So the first thing to do would be to work together with Simon to create >>> a new review request based on the latest spec / srpm you've available for >>> UH. >> >> >> That's still on fedorapeople; though it needs some work as it's >> probably around 1 year old. Plus the patch (to use system wide fonts, >> LinLibertine and UMing) needs to be rebased against the current >> release. No worries, I got all of that covered already. The only >> blocker is Fedora guichan not supporting UTF8 (which is used by UH). >> > > Hmm, UTF-8 support sounds like a potential big change the guichan, we > would really prefer to see support for something like that go in through > upstream, but if that is not working out I think we can come to > another solution. See above. That's all you need currently. > > >>> In the FIFE bug I've read that the problem with UH is that some of >>> the game content files are of unclear origin, this is an absolute >>> blocker for getting UH into Fedora. So the first point of order >>> would be to make a list of all content (images, sounds, music, >>> level files, etc.), their origin and their license. >> >> >> Fixed over a year ago. That's old information, just to be clear, if >> such a problem existed UH wouldn't be distributed by Debian... > > > Good! > > >> >>> >>> Any file which is either of an unknown origin / has an unknown >>> license, or has a license Fedora does not accept will need to either >>> be relicensed (requires permission of the original author), or >>> replaced! >> >> >> That's not a problem and we can provide written evidence for the only >> file that can be dubious from the author, relicensing us (I don't >> remember what that file was, but it was a sound file if I'm not >> mistaken). > > > That is not necessary if the README (or some other docs) clearly > states that all resources are freely licensed and under which > license (or a list of licenses of different files have different > licenses), then we will trust upstream on that. > > >> >>> This license audit (and replacing any files with issues) is by >>> far the biggest job that needs doing. Once that is done the >>> rest of the work for getting UH into Fedora will be relatively >>> easy :) >> >> >> That stuff was already covered when that bug report was submitted ;) >> > > Great! > > >> This sunday we're meeting up (UH upstream) to discuss a few things. >> One of our goal is that we can run exactly the same codebase and fixes >> on all distributions that distribute UH; By trying to coordinate >> packagers we hope to accomplish the following: >> >> - use the same codebase and fixes in all distros and have them synched; >> - provide package updates and version updates on the day of the >> release for all distros; >> - Provide official support to the distributions which follow our >> packaging model (all the others I will suggest we use upstream static >> binary blobs through the loki installer, under the same model, with >> the codebase synched with distros); > > > Sounds great! > > Question, how did Debian solve the guichan issue? They didn't... Which means that you might get weird artifacts on screen. The patch was merged upstream 3 years ago, but no release was done after if I'm not mistaken. See above. > > Regards, > > Hans -- Nelson Marques // I've stopped trying to understand sandwiches with a third piece of bread in the middle... _______________________________________________ games mailing list games@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/games
