On 5/22/06, Michael Scherer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Le Jeudi 18 Mai 2006 12:10, Götz Waschk a écrit: > > On 5/18/06, Evan Vittitow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Yes. Me. PrBoom is useless without Doom Wads. It is in contrib. I am > > > doing this because I legally own the full versions of these games. I > > > gave them up 5 years ago when I became a Linux user moving from Dos, NOT > > > Windows. > > > > Hi, > > > > I think PrBoom should be removed from contrib and moved to plf. > > Technically speaking, there is nothing that forbid these engine to enter into > contribs. > > We always pushed everything that could go in contribs in contribs, to reduce > the ressources needed by plf and keep the focus on really problematic > packages. > The fact that no one ever said anything regarding prboom show there doesn't > seems to be a problem with it. What would be the plf reason : > "This package is in plf because it requires non free files that we do not > distribute" ? > > If we place the wads file in plf-nonfree, as we could then add requires to > have them working out of the box, then, ok, the engine would be better in plf > ( non-free ), but if we don't, i would prefer having them in contribs.
>From a user point of view, it's best if a requires gets added. I suggest the following : - Create 2 packages : prboom-engine and prboom-data-doom - prboom-engine requires "prboom-data" - prboom-data-doom provides "prboom-data" - Put prboom-data-doom in plf-nonfree - Put prboom-engine in plf-free while no free graphics exists. Once there's at least one free theme for prboom, put it in contrib (package should provides "prboom-data") and move prboom-engine to contrib too. _______________________________________________ PLF-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://www.zarb.org/mailman/listinfo/plf-discuss
