Bug#311479: Nexuiz: status update?

[Alexander Schmehl]

Hi!

* Bruno Kleinert <fuddl at gmx.de> [060621 20:31]:

> well, i didn't like the idea of messing up the diff.gz, either. on the
> other hand i thought that the hotfixes don't belong into
> the .orig.tar.gz...

Damn.  Now I forgot to ask Ganneff to reject -data, till we came to a
conclusion.  Not it's done, and we have a nexuiz-data_2.0-hotfix20060616
in the archive.  Sorry for that.

Now we have to deal with that; and we might need to discuss that, with
the stable release managers, too.


> i like the idea of having a nexuiz-hotfixes package to be flexible to
> include one ore more hotfixes.

Yes, I like the idea, too :)


> how about pulling the nexuiz-hoxfixes in, by creating a meta package,
> that depends on the hotfixes? this way, users wouldn't need to download
> the huge nexuiz-data package, because the only change was an added
> dependency.

Well... than we would need to tweak the game and server package to
depend on the -hotfix package, too.  And so we wouldn't need reupload
the big -data; and our users would'n need to download it.


> also this meta package could conflict with an old hotfix package, while
> a newer -data package is already installed. i mention this, because the
> hotfix package could break a newer -data package (files in the hotfix
> package can easily override files in the -data package (this would
> happen during the runtime of the nexuiz engine).

Uhm... I always thought these hotfixes would provide only additional
files?  Will it ever happen, that we need to change files in the -data
package?  That could be a real problem; and I'm not sure we can hande
these updates in a way we could get things into a stable point release
(and if I understood correclty, we might need this, since you have to
have the same data on the client and on the server to connect to a
server?)


> i'm not sure, if the meta-package isn't a shoot-in-the-foot. i could
> imagine that conflicting on other packages might lead into problems
> during an upgrade.

Till now I don't see the need for a conflict with an old version; if we
need to update that, we could use versioned dependencies.


> what do you think? if my idea is bs, i'll let -data depend on the
> -hotfix package. 

Difficult decission;  Depending on the answer to your next question, I
still think the best way would be:
- upload the -hotfix package
  - with both released hotfixes
  - with an conflict on the old -data
  - wait until it's through new
- upload a complete new -data package
  - without the first hotfix
    (Version will be changed; we'll need an eoch for that to work)
  - depend on -hotfix package

Well, you know nexuiz better, than I do (I only play it until I got shot
the tenth time; then I loose interest in that game ;)  So I leave the
decission to you.


> also i contacted asked upstream, if they can tell me, when their
> planned bugfix release will be out. perhaps they release it, before the
> nexuiz package go through new - could save us the -hotfix package
> atm! ;)

What did he said?  Could you please ask him, if future "hotfixes" might
touch/replace other files, or will they continue their "put this file
to /foo/bar; that will fix the problem"?


Yours sincerely,
  Alexander

-- 
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-games-devel/attachments/20060627/142b69bf/attachment.pgp