[aur-general] ufoai: separate packages or one big?
Hi, I've problem with deciding if it's better to have this great game splitted into two separate packages: package with data and package with game engine or if I should make one big package including both game data and engine. Now I'm maintaining it in two separate packages, but I still have problems with dependencies. Some users wrote me that it would be better to have data dependent on engine and some think exactly the opossite. How should I treat it? Thanks for any suggestion, Lukas "6xx" Jirkovsky
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 03:22:08PM +0100, Lukáš Jirkovský wrote:
Hi, I've problem with deciding if it's better to have this great game splitted into two separate packages: package with data and package with game engine or if I should make one big package including both game data and engine. Now I'm maintaining it in two separate packages, but I still have problems with dependencies. Some users wrote me that it would be better to have data dependent on engine and some think exactly the opossite. How should I treat it? Thanks for any suggestion, Lukas "6xx" Jirkovsky
Well, since it's already splitted upstream, it seems perfectly natural to keep it that way. About the dep, I would just do like flightgear and glest in community already do. flightgear depends on flightgear-data and glest depends on glest-data. That seems to be the reverse of what you did.
Yeah, originally it was done like in flightgear etc. but I've got some
comments to do it this way. So I'm totally confused.
I'll wait some time and if nobody point out some good reason not to do
it, I'll change it.
On 12/03/2008, Xavier
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 03:22:08PM +0100, Lukáš Jirkovský wrote:
Hi, I've problem with deciding if it's better to have this great game splitted into two separate packages: package with data and package with game engine or if I should make one big package including both game data and engine. Now I'm maintaining it in two separate packages, but I still have problems with dependencies. Some users wrote me that it would be better to have data dependent on engine and some think exactly the opossite. How should I treat it? Thanks for any suggestion, Lukas "6xx" Jirkovsky
Well, since it's already splitted upstream, it seems perfectly natural to keep it that way. About the dep, I would just do like flightgear and glest in community already do. flightgear depends on flightgear-data and glest depends on glest-data. That seems to be the reverse of what you did.
On 3/12/08, Lukáš Jirkovský
Yeah, originally it was done like in flightgear etc. but I've got some comments to do it this way. So I'm totally confused. I'll wait some time and if nobody point out some good reason not to do it, I'll change it.
Well, the only good reason I can think about to have the data depend on the binary would be if the binary is like an "engine" that can run different games that can be installed seperately. In that case it would be silly for the engine to depend on all the games. However, I guess that's not the case here, and the binary probably won't even run without the data? So then it should depend on it, and not the other way around. Just 2 cents, really. Bjørn
participants (3)
-
Bjørn Lindeijer
-
Lukáš Jirkovský
-
Xavier