On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:33:28 +0000, Simon McVittie <[email protected]> wrote: > [Stephen wrote] > >> Ideally the package > >> should use the zcode-interpreter alternative, although that isn't > >> supported by all packages Z-Machine emulators currently, and doesn't > >> work well with X- v. terminal-based interpreters. > > I suspect this may mean that the zcode-interpreter alternative isn't > very well designed, and it should either be a pair of alternatives > zcode-interpreter and x-zcode-interpreter (like www-browser and > x-www-browser), or just assume that in practice anyone running via the > alternative is a graphical environment (and so use a script that wraps > frotz in x-terminal-emulator if necessary). > > I think alternatives should always be thought of as an "API": when I run > any implementation of the alternative, in a specified environment (for > instance "in X"), with a specified set of command-line options (perhaps > none), it does a particular desirable thing (like "plays Quake"). For > instance, see /usr/share/doc/quake*/policy.txt for what it means to > implement quake[2]-engine[-server]. Not every alternative actually needs > a mini-policy like that, but it should always be possible to write one, > and actually writing one might be a good way to focus your thoughts.
I agree. Currently the alternative is provided by gargoyle-free, jzip and xzip; fizmo and frotz provide zcode-interpreter but don't install an alternative. I'll file a bug on jzip to ask if it would be possible for its alternative to open a terminal if necessary. That way we could just say that zcode-interpreter must work from X (which doesn't exclude its working from a terminal where appropriate). Regards, Stephen
pgpJoLE7eJZQ9.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
