[arch-general] Why not create a new repo specified for games ?
Hi all, I noticed that there are some games in the community repo. Some of them has _HUGE_ data packages. Why not create a new repo for those games? That will save some bandwidth if a mirror maintainer decided to not support games. By far, not everyone play game on our ArchLinux.
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:46 PM, <goodmenzy@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I noticed that there are some games in the community repo. Some of them has _HUGE_ data packages.
Why not create a new repo for those games? That will save some bandwidth if a mirror maintainer decided to not support games.
By far, not everyone play game on our ArchLinux.
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Unofficial_User_Repositories
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Oon-Ee Ng <ngoonee.talk@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:46 PM, <goodmenzy@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I noticed that there are some games in the community repo. Some of them has _HUGE_ data packages.
Why not create a new repo for those games? That will save some bandwidth if a mirror maintainer decided to not support games.
By far, not everyone play game on our ArchLinux.
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Unofficial_User_Repositories
There once was a gaming repo but I think it's dead https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=82380 https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=110700
goodmenzy@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I noticed that there are some games in the community repo. Some of them has _HUGE_ data packages.
Why not create a new repo for those games? That will save some bandwidth if a mirror maintainer decided to not support games.
By far, not everyone play game on our ArchLinux.
Not this discussion again. If you start this way, then how about separating out other big packages as well? This doesn't exactly keep things simple. Besides, other distros have much bigger binary repos than we do and they still get mirrored. -- Sven-Hendrik
On 01/11/11 09:57, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
goodmenzy@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I noticed that there are some games in the community repo. Some of them has _HUGE_ data packages.
Why not create a new repo for those games? That will save some bandwidth if a mirror maintainer decided to not support games.
By far, not everyone play game on our ArchLinux.
Not this discussion again. If you start this way, then how about separating out other big packages as well? This doesn't exactly keep things simple.
Besides, other distros have much bigger binary repos than we do and they still get mirrored.
-- Sven-Hendrik Arch-Games is indeed dead, most of the maintainers became TU ironically...
Making repo categories would indeed be a mess as Sven states. -- Jelle van der Waa
I support this idea. Keep most games in AUR and the more popular ones can have their own repo [games] on a separate server. This server could be community financed using donations and if not enough interest will be raised for new repo, all these huge games can be moved to AUR and the smaller ones can stay in [community]. That's my view at it. On 01/11/11 05:46, goodmenzy@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I noticed that there are some games in the community repo. Some of them has _HUGE_ data packages.
Why not create a new repo for those games? That will save some bandwidth if a mirror maintainer decided to not support games.
By far, not everyone play game on our ArchLinux.
-- Best Regards, Matej Ľach e-mail: contact@matej-lach.net web: www.matej-lach.net Use Arch Linux on your desktop and CyanogenMod on your mobile device!
I support this idea. Keep most games in AUR and the more popular ones can have their own repo [games] on a separate server. This server could be community financed using donations and if not enough interest will be raised for new repo, all these huge games can be moved to AUR and the smaller ones can stay in [community].
That's my view at it. Having another repo for large packages is not useful. The benefit of
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:40, Matej Ľach <matej.lach@gmail.com> wrote: the old arch-games project was just that we compiled and hosted things that weren't already in the repo.
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Daenyth Blank <daenyth+arch@gmail.com> wrote:
I support this idea. Keep most games in AUR and the more popular ones can have their own repo [games] on a separate server. This server could be community financed using donations and if not enough interest will be raised for new repo, all these huge games can be moved to AUR and the smaller ones can stay in [community].
That's my view at it. Having another repo for large packages is not useful. The benefit of
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:40, Matej Ľach <matej.lach@gmail.com> wrote: the old arch-games project was just that we compiled and hosted things that weren't already in the repo.
What exactly would be too large? LibreOffice? jre7-openjdk? Qt? ;-) I'm with Daenyth here: provide an unofficial repo if you like but don't drop apps that are in the official repos - excluding the nexuiz-xonotic switcheroo.
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Matej Ľach <matej.lach@gmail.com> wrote:
I support this idea. Keep most games in AUR and the more popular ones can have their own repo [games] on a separate server. This server could be community financed using donations and if not enough interest will be raised for new repo, all these huge games can be moved to AUR and the smaller ones can stay in [community].
Kudos :) This is an awesome idea, I think it would be better than having to rebuild every game from sources every time a developer updates it. Now, we have these two ways to do this thing. I think an official repository mirrored as the same as core, extra and testing would be a better way to do it, because we do not have enough money to host a project like this (I believe), and no one will ever moan for one or two GBs of new packages in a new directory. Am I wrong? -- Bl@ster / dottorblaster
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Alessio 'Blaster' Biancalana <dottorblaster@archlinux.us> wrote:
Kudos :) This is an awesome idea, I think it would be better than having to rebuild every game from sources every time a developer updates it. Now, we have these two ways to do this thing. I think an official repository mirrored as the same as core, extra and testing would be a better way to do it, because we do not have enough money to host a project like this (I believe), and no one will ever moan for one or two GBs of new packages in a new directory.
Am I wrong?
-- Bl@ster / dottorblaster
If it's an official repo you need to be at least a TU to maintain these packages.
2011/11/1 Matej Ľach <matej.lach@gmail.com>:
I support this idea. Keep most games in AUR and the more popular ones can have their own repo [games] on a separate server. This server could be community financed using donations and if not enough interest will be raised for new repo, all these huge games can be moved to AUR and the smaller ones can stay in [community].
That's my view at it.
I have been saying that since two or three years ago. As i've said before, games is not the strong point of any Linux distribution, and nobody use linux to game, face it, some people download games, but most of the gamer people are playing consoles, not even a desktop/laptop computer.. For me having another repo [games] won't be a mess, and for non-gamers won't be a mess either cause we won't play games!. games are not popular software like KDE/GNOME (which I don't use), even if you try harder to justify about "other bigger packages" no dude, games are not so popular to this size of mb. It's a relation popular <-> disk space. But well, i'm done with this, games in repos are hurting our distro instead helping it.. Good luck -- Angel Velásquez angvp @ irc.freenode.net Arch Linux Developer / Trusted User Linux Counter: #359909 http://www.angvp.com
On 11/01/2011 07:01 PM, Ángel Velásquez wrote:
2011/11/1 Matej Ľach<matej.lach@gmail.com>:
I support this idea. Keep most games in AUR and the more popular ones can have their own repo [games] on a separate server. This server could be community financed using donations and if not enough interest will be raised for new repo, all these huge games can be moved to AUR and the smaller ones can stay in [community].
That's my view at it.
I have been saying that since two or three years ago.
As i've said before, games is not the strong point of any Linux distribution, and nobody use linux to game, face it, some people download games, but most of the gamer people are playing consoles, not even a desktop/laptop computer..
For me having another repo [games] won't be a mess, and for non-gamers won't be a mess either cause we won't play games!. games are not popular software like KDE/GNOME (which I don't use), even if you try harder to justify about "other bigger packages" no dude, games are not so popular to this size of mb. It's a relation popular<-> disk space.
But well, i'm done with this, games in repos are hurting our distro instead helping it..
Good luck
Is not like we need space for something else right now. This discussion is pointless. Let it die -- Ionuț
2011/11/1 Ángel Velásquez <angvp@archlinux.org>
I have been saying that since two or three years ago.
As i've said before, games is not the strong point of any Linux distribution, and nobody use linux to game, face it, some people download games, but most of the gamer people are playing consoles, not even a desktop/laptop computer..
For me having another repo [games] won't be a mess, and for non-gamers won't be a mess either cause we won't play games!. games are not popular software like KDE/GNOME (which I don't use), even if you try harder to justify about "other bigger packages" no dude, games are not so popular to this size of mb. It's a relation popular <-> disk space.
But well, i'm done with this, games in repos are hurting our distro instead helping it..
Good luck
You are ill informed, indie games are making millions and services such as Desura are introducing them to the Linux community. Oh and by the way, I game on Arch, your assumption that nobody does is preposterous. Also, Linux is always more considerate towards the "Humble Bundles", http://www.humblebundle.com/, take a look at the average purchase price, Linux is top, and is consistently on the bundles. Please don't assume what I do on my system. -- Jason Steadman http://www.meyithi.com/ http://twitter.com/meyithi
On (11/01/11 16:40), Matej Ľach wrote: -~> I support this idea. -~> Keep most games in AUR and the more popular ones can have their -~> own repo [games] on a separate server. -~> This server could be community financed using donations and if not -~> enough interest will be raised for new repo, all these huge games -~> can be moved to AUR and the smaller ones can stay in [community]. -~> -~> That's my view at it. -~> +1, but what I can't understand is why the MiB size is a figure of merit? Instead a more relevant question, imho, is why waste server resources and time on bad software? Most of these games are either from 1990 era or developed simply for fun and have poor quality, especially compared to multi-million budgeted Windows games. And look at the number of game pkgs per TU in community. Most likely these packages are simply being routinely rebuilt without seeing much usage. -- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Leonid Isaev wrote:
On (11/01/11 16:40), Matej Ľach wrote: -~> I support this idea. -~> Keep most games in AUR and the more popular ones can have their -~> own repo [games] on a separate server. -~> This server could be community financed using donations and if not -~> enough interest will be raised for new repo, all these huge games -~> can be moved to AUR and the smaller ones can stay in [community]. -~> -~> That's my view at it. -~>
+1, but what I can't understand is why the MiB size is a figure of merit? Instead a more relevant question, imho, is why waste server resources and time on bad software?
Most of these games are either from 1990 era or developed simply for fun and have poor quality, especially compared to multi-million budgeted Windows games. And look at the number of game pkgs per TU in community. Most likely these packages are simply being routinely rebuilt without seeing much usage.
I would like this too. Maybe community-extra. I would not sync it, and I would even considering publically mirroring core/extra/community/testing/community-testing if all the games (it is the nany game data packages that are huge and not worth mirroing for me). Sincerely, Dwight Schauer
I don't code, can we please move all coding tools to a separate repo so I don't have to sync it? thanks -- Jason Steadman http://www.meyithi.com/ http://twitter.com/meyithi
2011/11/1 Meyithi <mail@meyithi.com>:
I don't code, can we please move all coding tools to a separate repo so I don't have to sync it?
thanks
You're a troll, you have a separate repo for you add it it's called [troll].
-- Jason Steadman http://www.meyithi.com/ http://twitter.com/meyithi
-- Angel Velásquez angvp @ irc.freenode.net Arch Linux Developer / Trusted User Linux Counter: #359909 http://www.angvp.com
2011/11/1 Ángel Velásquez <angvp@archlinux.org>:
2011/11/1 Meyithi <mail@meyithi.com>:
I don't code, can we please move all coding tools to a separate repo so I don't have to sync it?
thanks
You're a troll, you have a separate repo for you add it it's called [troll].
Actually I think there is a valid point being made. If we created a repo for [games] why not [browsers], [code], lets just get a repo for everything!
On (11/01/11 16:01), Calvin Morrison wrote: -~> 2011/11/1 Ángel Velásquez <angvp@archlinux.org>: -~> > 2011/11/1 Meyithi <mail@meyithi.com>: -~> >> I don't code, can we please move all coding tools to a separate repo so I -~> >> don't have to sync it? -~> >> -~> >> thanks -~> > -~> > You're a troll, you have a separate repo for you add it it's called [troll]. -~> > -~> -~> Actually I think there is a valid point being made. If we created a -~> repo for [games] why not [browsers], [code], lets just get a repo for -~> everything! First of all, because this has already been done in openSuSE (a separete repo for texlive, for new KDE/gnome, for multimedia, etc...) -- not cool inho. Second, because compilers are needed for core system tasks, browsers are general purpose software, and so on. This is what [core/extra] are about. The point here is to separate apps not by purpose but overall quality. While you can argue all day long about creating (or not) a repo for security apps, games definitely fall into a [poor software] category which you can name [games], [communitty-extra] or whatever. -- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Leonid Isaev <lisaev@umail.iu.edu> wrote:
On (11/01/11 16:01), Calvin Morrison wrote: -~> 2011/11/1 Ángel Velásquez <angvp@archlinux.org>: -~> > 2011/11/1 Meyithi <mail@meyithi.com>: -~> >> I don't code, can we please move all coding tools to a separate repo so I -~> >> don't have to sync it? -~> >> -~> >> thanks -~> > -~> > You're a troll, you have a separate repo for you add it it's called [troll]. -~> > -~> -~> Actually I think there is a valid point being made. If we created a -~> repo for [games] why not [browsers], [code], lets just get a repo for -~> everything!
First of all, because this has already been done in openSuSE (a separete repo for texlive, for new KDE/gnome, for multimedia, etc...) -- not cool inho.
Second, because compilers are needed for core system tasks, browsers are general purpose software, and so on. This is what [core/extra] are about.
The point here is to separate apps not by purpose but overall quality. While you can argue all day long about creating (or not) a repo for security apps, games definitely fall into a [poor software] category which you can name [games], [communitty-extra] or whatever.
-- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
Let's start by asking why we should change anything at all? I'm aware of http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2011-October/016170.html but Pierre warned against adding new huge packages, he didn't say TUs need to drop some of the packages they currently maintain. I'm not running a mirror and I have plenty mirrors to sync from in Europe and I don't know how does the current repo structure impact the mirror providers and users w/o any mirrors close to their location.
On 01-11-2011 17:34, Leonid Isaev wrote:
On (11/01/11 16:40), Matej Ľach wrote: -~> I support this idea. -~> Keep most games in AUR and the more popular ones can have their -~> own repo [games] on a separate server. -~> This server could be community financed using donations and if not -~> enough interest will be raised for new repo, all these huge games -~> can be moved to AUR and the smaller ones can stay in [community]. -~> -~> That's my view at it. -~>
+1, but what I can't understand is why the MiB size is a figure of merit? Instead a more relevant question, imho, is why waste server resources and time on bad software?
Most of these games are either from 1990 era or developed simply for fun and have poor quality, especially compared to multi-million budgeted Windows games. And look at the number of game pkgs per TU in community. Most likely these packages are simply being routinely rebuilt without seeing much usage.
So in short you mean the community should dismiss free linux games only because they have low usage and are developed/maintained in the spare time of their maintainers/developers, which most of the times have very small or nonexistent budgets and instead favor multi-million budgeted games which most of the times although pretty and shinny are utter rubbish in every other respect. By that logic we might as well stop using gnu/linux in the desktop since the global usage falls within statistical uncertainty levels or as some would would like it to be, a rounding error. -- Mauro Santos
On (11/01/11 20:45), Mauro Santos wrote: -~> On 01-11-2011 17:34, Leonid Isaev wrote: -~> > On (11/01/11 16:40), Matej Ľach wrote: -~> > -~> I support this idea. -~> > -~> Keep most games in AUR and the more popular ones can have their -~> > -~> own repo [games] on a separate server. -~> > -~> This server could be community financed using donations and if not -~> > -~> enough interest will be raised for new repo, all these huge games -~> > -~> can be moved to AUR and the smaller ones can stay in [community]. -~> > -~> -~> > -~> That's my view at it. -~> > -~> -~> > -~> > +1, but what I can't understand is why the MiB size is a figure of merit? -~> > Instead a more relevant question, imho, is why waste server resources and time -~> > on bad software? -~> > -~> > Most of these games are either from 1990 era or developed simply for fun and -~> > have poor quality, especially compared to multi-million budgeted Windows games. -~> > And look at the number of game pkgs per TU in community. Most likely these -~> > packages are simply being routinely rebuilt without seeing much usage. -~> > -~> -~> So in short you mean the community should dismiss free linux games only -~> because they have low usage and are developed/maintained in the spare -~> time of their maintainers/developers, which most of the times have very -~> small or nonexistent budgets and instead favor multi-million budgeted -~> games which most of the times although pretty and shinny are utter -~> rubbish in every other respect. -~> -~> By that logic we might as well stop using gnu/linux in the desktop since -~> the global usage falls within statistical uncertainty levels or as some -~> would would like it to be, a rounding error. -~> -~> -- -~> Mauro Santos Games are like movies -- w/o budget they become reality shows. For comparison, gcc IS competitive with intel/PG compilers. Besides, what is the serious GPU (i.e. not Intel) support in linux, when you also consider performance? Similar to MacOS and well below Win. -- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
People, what about just stopping this discussion? This topic was discussed so many times in too long threads here on the mailing list, always with the same old arguments for both sides, and always with the same result: Nothing was changed because there's no reason. If the package size was the reason, I'm pretty sure that those packages would have been removed from the repos by the devs and TUs long ago, or they would have found another solution. Any other reasons are just psychological, that e.g. game haters don't see the games by running a pacman -Ss. And people who are addicted to games and think they can help themselves by not having games in the repos betray themselves, because it's so easy to adding another [games] repo to pacman.conf, and they most likely would do it. This would in fact be the only reason for having a separate [games] repo I can see. And then the ideas of [community-extra] etc. What's the point of that? Either a [games] repo or nothing. And keep the Arch philosophy in mind: KISS So I bet, this discussion will get you nowhere. Heiko
On 01-11-2011 21:01, Leonid Isaev wrote:
On (11/01/11 20:45), Mauro Santos wrote: -~> On 01-11-2011 17:34, Leonid Isaev wrote: -~> > On (11/01/11 16:40), Matej Ľach wrote: -~> > -~> I support this idea. -~> > -~> Keep most games in AUR and the more popular ones can have their -~> > -~> own repo [games] on a separate server. -~> > -~> This server could be community financed using donations and if not -~> > -~> enough interest will be raised for new repo, all these huge games -~> > -~> can be moved to AUR and the smaller ones can stay in [community]. -~> > -~> -~> > -~> That's my view at it. -~> > -~> -~> > -~> > +1, but what I can't understand is why the MiB size is a figure of merit? -~> > Instead a more relevant question, imho, is why waste server resources and time -~> > on bad software? -~> > -~> > Most of these games are either from 1990 era or developed simply for fun and -~> > have poor quality, especially compared to multi-million budgeted Windows games. -~> > And look at the number of game pkgs per TU in community. Most likely these -~> > packages are simply being routinely rebuilt without seeing much usage. -~> > -~> -~> So in short you mean the community should dismiss free linux games only -~> because they have low usage and are developed/maintained in the spare -~> time of their maintainers/developers, which most of the times have very -~> small or nonexistent budgets and instead favor multi-million budgeted -~> games which most of the times although pretty and shinny are utter -~> rubbish in every other respect. -~> -~> By that logic we might as well stop using gnu/linux in the desktop since -~> the global usage falls within statistical uncertainty levels or as some -~> would would like it to be, a rounding error. -~> -~> -- -~> Mauro Santos
Games are like movies -- w/o budget they become reality shows. For comparison, gcc IS competitive with intel/PG compilers. Besides, what is the serious GPU (i.e. not Intel) support in linux, when you also consider performance? Similar to MacOS and well below Win.
True, however there are games that can be perfectly played with the free drivers. Performance and feature support is also getting better but it takes time, as you may know very well, only very recently has the needed documentation been released for some gpus so there are many things to be done to bring support to the level of closed drivers. Getting a bit more into topic, the size of games, how would you expect to have a game that can look anywhere similar to contemporary games and not use some space? Contemporary games space usage is measured in gigabytes so by comparison I'd say free games are doing quite well. -- Mauro Santos
On (11/01/11 22:38), Mauro Santos wrote: -~> On 01-11-2011 21:01, Leonid Isaev wrote: -~> > On (11/01/11 20:45), Mauro Santos wrote: -~> > -~> On 01-11-2011 17:34, Leonid Isaev wrote: -~> > -~> > On (11/01/11 16:40), Matej Ľach wrote: -~> > -~> > -~> I support this idea. -~> > -~> > -~> Keep most games in AUR and the more popular ones can have their -~> > -~> > -~> own repo [games] on a separate server. -~> > -~> > -~> This server could be community financed using donations and if not -~> > -~> > -~> enough interest will be raised for new repo, all these huge games -~> > -~> > -~> can be moved to AUR and the smaller ones can stay in [community]. -~> > -~> > -~> -~> > -~> > -~> That's my view at it. -~> > -~> > -~> -~> > -~> > -~> > -~> > +1, but what I can't understand is why the MiB size is a figure of merit? -~> > -~> > Instead a more relevant question, imho, is why waste server resources and time -~> > -~> > on bad software? -~> > -~> > -~> > -~> > Most of these games are either from 1990 era or developed simply for fun and -~> > -~> > have poor quality, especially compared to multi-million budgeted Windows games. -~> > -~> > And look at the number of game pkgs per TU in community. Most likely these -~> > -~> > packages are simply being routinely rebuilt without seeing much usage. -~> > -~> > -~> > -~> -~> > -~> So in short you mean the community should dismiss free linux games only -~> > -~> because they have low usage and are developed/maintained in the spare -~> > -~> time of their maintainers/developers, which most of the times have very -~> > -~> small or nonexistent budgets and instead favor multi-million budgeted -~> > -~> games which most of the times although pretty and shinny are utter -~> > -~> rubbish in every other respect. -~> > -~> -~> > -~> By that logic we might as well stop using gnu/linux in the desktop since -~> > -~> the global usage falls within statistical uncertainty levels or as some -~> > -~> would would like it to be, a rounding error. -~> > -~> -~> > -~> -- -~> > -~> Mauro Santos -~> > -~> > Games are like movies -- w/o budget they become reality shows. For comparison, -~> > gcc IS competitive with intel/PG compilers. Besides, what is the serious GPU -~> > (i.e. not Intel) support in linux, when you also consider performance? Similar -~> > to MacOS and well below Win. -~> > -~> -~> True, however there are games that can be perfectly played with the free -~> drivers. Performance and feature support is also getting better but it -~> takes time, as you may know very well, only very recently has the needed -~> documentation been released for some gpus so there are many things to be -~> done to bring support to the level of closed drivers. -~> -~> Getting a bit more into topic, the size of games, how would you expect -~> to have a game that can look anywhere similar to contemporary games and -~> not use some space? Contemporary games space usage is measured in I don't. -~> gigabytes so by comparison I'd say free games are doing quite well. Again, it's not about the size, but rather about cleanup. But eventually, it is up to respective maintainers to decide whether to keep games in community or not... -~> -~> -- -~> Mauro Santos -- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
On 2011-11-01 3:01 PM, Leonid Isaev wrote:
Besides, what is the serious GPU (i.e. not Intel) support in linux, when you also consider performance? Similar to MacOS and well below Win. The propriety nVidia driver is actually quite good and has been for ages.
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 11:24:05AM -0600, Brendan Long wrote:
On 2011-11-01 3:01 PM, Leonid Isaev wrote:
Besides, what is the serious GPU (i.e. not Intel) support in linux, when you also consider performance? Similar to MacOS and well below Win. The propriety nVidia driver is actually quite good and has been for ages.
Oh, slightly off-topic, you just mentioned graphical hardware support. Graphical demos, say of the the ASD type, run excellently with linux on even average hardware. cheers! mar77i
participants (18)
-
Alessio 'Blaster' Biancalana
-
Brendan Long
-
Calvin Morrison
-
Daenyth Blank
-
Dwight Schauer
-
goodmenzy＠gmail.com
-
Heiko Baums
-
Ionut Biru
-
Jelle van der Waa
-
Karol Blazewicz
-
Leonid Isaev
-
Martti Kühne
-
Matej Ľach
-
Mauro Santos
-
Meyithi
-
Oon-Ee Ng
-
Sven-Hendrik Haase
-
Ángel Velásquez