Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=682544 --- Comment #15 from Carlo Teubner <ct.spammable@xxxxxxxxx> 2011-12-18 10:13:47 EST --- Is there any chance that this will get sponsored at some point? If so, I might work on packaging the latest version of Gargoyle (2011.1) for Fedora 16. For reference, here's what the Gargoyle upstream maintainer, Ben Cressey, said when I asked him about the possibility of depending on upstream interpreters. "It might be possible to pull in the interpreters as dependent packages, however most of them are not actively maintained and no package exists. "Even where an upstream version exists, building them for Gargoyle is akin to building them for a different UI toolkit. I don't know what Fedora's policy is on maintaining separate packages linked to Qt versus Gtk, but it seems reasonable to me that the requisite changes to the source would be treated as a fork rather than pushed upstream. "Gargoyle's Glk implementation is an alternative both to other Glk implementations and native UI toolkits (Gtk/Qt). Under Linux it is the de facto standard for Glk since it is the only one with multimedia support that is actively maintained. But that just means that an IF interpreter built for Linux will target the native UI toolkit instead, to avoid being locked into Gargoyle. "If the objection is that Frotz exists as a Fedora package, I should mention that Gargoyle bundles GlkFrotz which is now an independent fork. The version packaged for Fedora appears to be much older and probably lacks support for Unicode and the Z-Machine Standard 1.1." -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review