On Apr 9, 3:53 am, Andrew Sidwell <takka...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Magnate wrote:
> > "Andrew Sidwell" <takka...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
> >> Yeah, Pete got it right. :) Though I'd rather the debian build of
the
> >> next release didn't contain X11 just because then the game will be
Free
> >> Software and thus be able to sit happily in main. The bit that isn't
free
> >> software is the BMP im****ter; to fix this, someone would have to
write a
> >> PNG loader replacement using libpng. (Volunteers always welcome!)
>
> > Hmm. Is the BMP im****ter included in the main Angband-3.0.9b source
tarball?
>
> Yes.
>
> > If so then it won't get into debian/main, and you don't need to dump
X11
> > sup****t (at least, not for that reason.If the BMP im****ter is a
separate
> > download, then it doesn't contaminate the Angband package, and Angband
can
> > go into main (if we dump X11). I can always make a separate non-free
package
> > for the BMP im****ter if you want.
>
> This is true for 3.0.9b, but I was thinking ahead to the next version
> (3.1.0). Making a separate package for the BMP im****ter would be
> pointless because you'd have to split it out into a library first, and
> then it would still be under the Angband licence, and AIUI the GPL'd
> Angband binary couldn't link to it (according to the traditional/FSF
> interpretation of the GPL). The solution is just to write a PNG
> loader/drop the X11 ****t.
>
> > Personally I don't think dropping X11 from the Debian package is too
> > terrible, since the vast majority of Debian users will be able to use
at
> > least one of SDL or GTK. In fact I think it might be worth
investigating
> > making it into separate packages: angband-sdl and angband-gtk, since
you
> > don't need both. The current Debian package (3.0.9a) actually uses Xaw
by
> > default, so that's definitely going to change in any case.
>
> > I'm not so convinced about the wisdom of dropping X11 sup****t more
> > generally. As Pete implies, there are a number of *nix platforms which
won't
> > sup****t either GTK or SDL, and as such wouldn't be able to run Angband
> > except using ncurses (single window etc.). Hmmm.
>
> I have my doubts that there are any modern Unix platforms which don't
> sup****t either GTK or SDL. The Mac doesn't, but that Mac has its own
> ****t; Sun's OpenSolaris uses a patched GNOME desktop environment; BSD
> users have just the same choice as Linux users; and Linux users can most
> certainly use either. I'm not aware of any other currently-used Unixes.
>
> Please note that the word "sup****t" applied to the X11 ****t means "no
> one really maintains it or knows their way around it and it just happens
> to not have broken yet". I have less-than-no motivation to learn how to
> program X Windows (and the same with the Win32 API) but if someone else
> has, they're free to come along and save it. :) As it is, I think it's
> more im****tant to get the source GPL-clean and remove unmaintained
> components.
Just noting here the suggestion from the angband-dev mailing list that
dropping tile sup****t from the X11 ****t would (a) make the X11 ****t
free and (b) leave it available for anyone who really couldn't use SDL
or GTK.
Nick.
|
