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$$ package of UH!
NM
-- Nelson Marques // I've stopped trying to understand sandwiches with a third piece of bread in the middle...
Hi,
On 05/11/2012 10:40 PM, Nelson Marques wrote:
Hi all,
The wishlist for GAMES SIG in Fedora contemplates Unknown Horizons (UH); I'm a part of upstream UH and I've packaged it in the past for Fedora and openSUSE and served it through a 3rd party repository to both platforms.
I know that Simon was working on this since 2009, and it's not my interest to override someone, so if Simon wants to keep on packaging UH, it's cool with me, nevertheless I would like to be involved as well on this so that UH can be updated in time and can be available on Fedora on the release date. My goal is also to provide upstream support to Fedora users, this is why it's important somehow to us that we have some control over UH packages.
I have submited a request for UH in Fedora in the past, which I closed later after knowing Simon was working on it; things have changed and we (UH upstream) want to colaborate with the Fedora community to achieve the best solution possible for Fedora users.
Another issue comes with FIFE, the engine that powers up UH; I would like to be involved in this package also (Simon's co-maintainer ?), as I also have good relations and would like that upstream FIFE could support officially the Fedora platform and packages.
I look forward to get some feedback regarding FIFE and UH and to work with GAMES Sig on Fedora to provide a kick a$$ 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 found: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=718430
That review request points to this (recently fixed) FIFE bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757352
But AFAIK there is no new review request for UH, did I miss it?
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 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.
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 replaced!
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 easy :)
Regards,
Hans
2012/5/12 Hans de Goede hdegoede@redhat.com:
Hi,
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 found: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=718430
That review request points to this (recently fixed) FIFE bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757352
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 UH.
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 replaced!
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 mistaken).
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 easy :)
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; - etc...
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...
Thanks :) I'll keep people informed.
Regards,
Hans
Hi,
On 05/12/2012 07:15 PM, Nelson Marques wrote:
2012/5/12 Hans de Goedehdegoede@redhat.com:
<snip>
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 found: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=718430
That review request points to this (recently fixed) FIFE bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757352
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:
- 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.
- 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);
Ok.
- 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.
As long as the patch does not change the API (extending it is ok), then that should not be a problem.
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 UH.
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).
Hmm, UTF-8 support sounds like a potential big change the guichan, we would really prefer to see support for something like that go in through upstream, but if that is not working out I think we can come to another solution.
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...
Good!
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 replaced!
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 mistaken).
That is not necessary if the README (or some other docs) clearly states that all resources are freely licensed and under which license (or a list of licenses of different files have different licenses), then we will trust upstream on that.
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 easy :)
That stuff was already covered when that bug report was submitted ;)
Great!
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);
Sounds great!
Question, how did Debian solve the guichan issue?
Regards,
Hans
2012/5/13 Hans de Goede hdegoede@redhat.com:
Hi,
On 05/12/2012 07:15 PM, Nelson Marques wrote:
2012/5/12 Hans de Goedehdegoede@redhat.com:
<snip>
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 found: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=718430
That review request points to this (recently fixed) FIFE bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757352
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);
Ok.
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.
As long as the patch does not change the API (extending it is ok), then that should not be a problem.
http://gitorious.org/guichan/mainline/commit/90c8966f6cb153d6ab03e146d3ade33...
The patch was commited upstream, it's a simple 1 liner, but no release was issued after it... So when a release happens we can drop it; Now... I don't see why we can't add this patch.
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 UH.
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).
Hmm, UTF-8 support sounds like a potential big change the guichan, we would really prefer to see support for something like that go in through upstream, but if that is not working out I think we can come to another solution.
See above. That's all you need currently.
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...
Good!
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 replaced!
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 mistaken).
That is not necessary if the README (or some other docs) clearly states that all resources are freely licensed and under which license (or a list of licenses of different files have different licenses), then we will trust upstream on that.
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 easy :)
That stuff was already covered when that bug report was submitted ;)
Great!
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);
Sounds great!
Question, how did Debian solve the guichan issue?
They didn't... Which means that you might get weird artifacts on screen. The patch was merged upstream 3 years ago, but no release was done after if I'm not mistaken. See above.
Regards,
Hans
Hi,
On 05/13/2012 08:05 PM, Nelson Marques wrote:
2012/5/13 Hans de Goedehdegoede@redhat.com:
Hi,
On 05/12/2012 07:15 PM, Nelson Marques wrote:
2012/5/12 Hans de Goedehdegoede@redhat.com:
<snip>
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 found: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=718430
That review request points to this (recently fixed) FIFE bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757352
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:
- 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.
- 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);
Ok.
- 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.
As long as the patch does not change the API (extending it is ok), then that should not be a problem.
http://gitorious.org/guichan/mainline/commit/90c8966f6cb153d6ab03e146d3ade33...
The patch was commited upstream, it's a simple 1 liner, but no release was issued after it... So when a release happens we can drop it; Now... I don't see why we can't add this patch.
Good News, we (Fedora) are have that patch in our packages :)
Regards,
Hans
Hans and all,
I've re-opened the ticket for python-enet (previously pyenet) and made some changes, including the package name.
* http://nmarques.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-enet/
If anyone can help with the review (I know Tom is a very busy man) would most welcome; python-enet requires also libenet (ENet) >= 1.3.3; as I am aware Tom has updated the dependencies already for ENet.
I'm currently uploading the unknown-horizons SRPM and spec also (will take some time since it's a fat SRPM and my home connection uplink is... well.... slow... When it's over (20 mins or so) it will be here:
* http://nmarques.fedorapeople.org/packages/unknown-horizons/
NM
2012/5/14 Hans de Goede hdegoede@redhat.com:
Hi,
On 05/13/2012 08:05 PM, Nelson Marques wrote:
2012/5/13 Hans de Goedehdegoede@redhat.com:
Hi,
On 05/12/2012 07:15 PM, Nelson Marques wrote:
2012/5/12 Hans de Goedehdegoede@redhat.com:
<snip>
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 found: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=718430
That review request points to this (recently fixed) FIFE bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757352
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);
Ok.
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.
As long as the patch does not change the API (extending it is ok), then that should not be a problem.
http://gitorious.org/guichan/mainline/commit/90c8966f6cb153d6ab03e146d3ade33...
The patch was commited upstream, it's a simple 1 liner, but no release was issued after it... So when a release happens we can drop it; Now... I don't see why we can't add this patch.
Good News, we (Fedora) are have that patch in our packages :)
Regards,
Hans
Hi,
On 05/15/2012 09:19 PM, Nelson Marques wrote:
Hans and all,
I've re-opened the ticket for python-enet (previously pyenet) and made some changes, including the package name.
If anyone can help with the review (I know Tom is a very busy man) would most welcome;
I'm afraid I'm a very busy man too :) The best advise I can give you is to swap reviews, simply send a mail with the title "review swap" to the fedora-devel list and offer to other packagers to swap a review of one of their packages with a review of python-enet. That usually gets the job done.
Regards,
Hans
-
Hans de Goede -
Nelson Marques