On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Paul Wise <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Vincent Cheng <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Similar to why 0 A.D. needs libenet 1.2; Philip explained earlier that 0 > > A.D. needs a specific version of Spidermonkey (1.8.5) in order to > maintain > > compatibility, since it uses advanced Spidermonkey features and users > with > > different versions of Spidermonkey may run into issues in multiplayer > games > > (as an > > as an ? > > Oops, don't know why I broke off mid-sentence like that. My point was that porting 0 A.D. to work with newer versions of Spidermonkey seems to be a lot of work for very little gain and lots of opportunities for potential breakage. Philip addressed this already in an earlier message [1].
However, the Debian Mozilla team doesn't seem to be very enthusiastic about supporting an older version of Spidermonkey in the long run. What would be the best course of action now? I don't want to pressure upstream to port 0 A.D. to a newer Spidermonkey version if they have no desire to do so (and I have no clue how to port software), I can't pressure the Debian Mozilla team to maintain an older Spidermonkey version for a single piece of software (and I'm sure that they have a lot of other work to do), and from the replies I've seen so far, it seems that embedding Spidermonkey code in 0 A.D.'s source is a no-no, or at least strongly discouraged. > > Just wanted some clarification; if upstream chooses not to implement a > build > > system where fonts are converted into glyphs/bitmaps during the build, > and > > instead stick with pre-rendered glyphs in the source package, it would be > ok > > to simply strip out the fonts, and not have to package them separately as > > you suggested in an earlier mail? > > No, since the fonts are the source code for those images and we have DFSG > #2. > > In an earlier message [2], you suggested that various .ttf fonts (DejaVuSans.ttf, DejaVuSansMono.ttf, texgyrepagella-regular.otf, texgyrepagella-bold.otf) should be removed from the source package. But on the other hand, since the fonts are source code for the glyphs, they shouldn't be removed, right? Sorry, but I can't help but feel somewhat confused... - Vincent [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-games/2011/04/msg00038.html [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-games/2011/04/msg00030.html
