2012/5/12 Hans de Goede <email@example.com>:
> On 05/11/2012 10:40 PM, Nelson Marques wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> The wishlist for GAMES SIG in Fedora contemplates Unknown Horizons
>> (UH); I'm a part of upstream UH and I've packaged it in the past for
>> Fedora and openSUSE and served it through a 3rd party repository to
>> both platforms.
>> I know that Simon was working on this since 2009, and it's not my
>> interest to override someone, so if Simon wants to keep on packaging
>> UH, it's cool with me, nevertheless I would like to be involved as
>> well on this so that UH can be updated in time and can be available on
>> Fedora on the release date. My goal is also to provide upstream
>> support to Fedora users, this is why it's important somehow to us that
>> we have some control over UH packages.
>> I have submited a request for UH in Fedora in the past, which I closed
>> later after knowing Simon was working on it; things have changed and
>> we (UH upstream) want to colaborate with the Fedora community to
>> achieve the best solution possible for Fedora users.
>> Another issue comes with FIFE, the engine that powers up UH; I would
>> like to be involved in this package also (Simon's co-maintainer ?), as
>> I also have good relations and would like that upstream FIFE could
>> support officially the Fedora platform and packages.
>> I look forward to get some feedback regarding FIFE and UH and to work
>> with GAMES Sig on Fedora to provide a kick a$$ package of UH!
> First of all, welcome to the Fedora Games mailinglist, and let me say that
> we would love to have Unknown Horizons in Fedora.
> You mentioned a review request for UH that you closed, which I indeed
> That review request points to this (recently fixed) FIFE bug:
> But AFAIK there is no new review request for UH, did I miss it?
I'm going to re-open it (the one you mentioned before) once we have
all the dependencies prepared, let go a bit further:
1. Tom (spot) has updated the dependencies required to update ENet
(libenet), which provides the base layer for multiplayer. With ENet
updated, I can continue with my review request for 'python-enet' which
provides the python bindings used by UH for Multiplayer.
2. FIFE - The packaging of FIFE isn't really as I would like to be.
I'm gathering soon with FIFE upstream to propose a packaging model
that upstream can support and hopefully to implement it on the next
release in Fedora (and openSUSE);
3. Guichan - a dependency to build FIFE; This probably the only
blocker as we need to submit a patch which was previously submited to
upstream, but no action was taken on it and upstream from guichan
seems to be masturbating themselves with UTF-8 implementation over the
last 2 years but no real release was made. I'm going to propose this
patch to Fedora guichan, which I don't mind also to co-maintain. If
guichan doesn't fix this, we're (UH upstream) prepared to fork guichan
so we don't have to strugle with vendors who can distribute UH.
> So the first thing to do would be to work together with Simon to create
> a new review request based on the latest spec / srpm you've available for
That's still on fedorapeople; though it needs some work as it's
probably around 1 year old. Plus the patch (to use system wide fonts,
LinLibertine and UMing) needs to be rebased against the current
release. No worries, I got all of that covered already. The only
blocker is Fedora guichan not supporting UTF8 (which is used by UH).
> In the FIFE bug I've read that the problem with UH is that some of
> the game content files are of unclear origin, this is an absolute
> blocker for getting UH into Fedora. So the first point of order
> would be to make a list of all content (images, sounds, music,
> level files, etc.), their origin and their license.
Fixed over a year ago. That's old information, just to be clear, if
such a problem existed UH wouldn't be distributed by Debian...
> Any file which is either of an unknown origin / has an unknown
> license, or has a license Fedora does not accept will need to either
> be relicensed (requires permission of the original author), or
That's not a problem and we can provide written evidence for the only
file that can be dubious from the author, relicensing us (I don't
remember what that file was, but it was a sound file if I'm not
> This license audit (and replacing any files with issues) is by
> far the biggest job that needs doing. Once that is done the
> rest of the work for getting UH into Fedora will be relatively
That stuff was already covered when that bug report was submitted
This sunday we're meeting up (UH upstream) to discuss a few things.
One of our goal is that we can run exactly the same codebase and fixes
on all distributions that distribute UH; By trying to coordinate
packagers we hope to accomplish the following:
- use the same codebase and fixes in all distros and have them synched;
- provide package updates and version updates on the day of the
release for all distros;
- Provide official support to the distributions which follow our
packaging model (all the others I will suggest we use upstream static
binary blobs through the loki installer, under the same model, with
the codebase synched with distros);
- Discuss the best way to provide the correct channels for the input
received from our users and improve UH;
After this similiar work will be done with FIFE... For which I am just
waiting for the meeting date to be reported to me... In one way since
FIFE premier client is UH, we want people who package/work with UH
also do the FIFE work so we have stuff perfectly synched for providing
the closest experience that upstream wants to give independent of the
vendor shipping the binaries...
This might take it's time... but it's happening...
I'll keep people informed.
// I've stopped trying to understand sandwiches with a third piece of
bread in the middle...
games mailing list