Re: CF: Crossfire 0.95.2 package naming

["Mark Wedel" <mark@icp.siemens.com>]

On Feb 1,  8:06pm, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
> Subject: Re: CF: Crossfire 0.95.2 package naming
> [Preston F. Crow]

> How about getting rid of the .tar.gz version and just use .tar.bz2?  I
> more than made up for it in download time (using my modem at home) the
> very first time I had need of it.

 But bzip2 is still quite a bit less common in number of programs using it for
distributions and availability on machines than gzip.  If someone comes to me
and says they can't deal with a distribution because they don't have gzip, I
don't have much sympathy, as most everything out there is gzip'd.  If instead
they say they had problems because they don't have bzip2, I have a bit more
sympathy.

On Feb 1,  1:17pm, Preston F. Crow wrote:
> Subject: Re: CF: Crossfire 0.95.2 package naming
> How about:
>
> crossfire-0.95.3-client.tar.bz2
> crossfire-0.95.3-server.tar.bz2
> crossfire-0.95.3-maps.tar.bz2
> crossfire-0.95.3-devel.tar.bz2
>
> -devel would be the -arch distribution, but could eventually be expanded
> to include the map editor.

 I thing doing crossfire-client-0.95.3.xxx instead to show that the client is
not really tightly coupled to the server version.  In practice, the client can
be spun off and maintained/released by someone other than me (any volunteers?)

 But this brings up another point I was thinking about -

 Make the server distributions pretty much source code only (remove the
archetypes, images, treasures, most files from the lib file into the map
distribution).  The reasoning I have behind this is there often isn't changes
made to the server that require updating the arch files (or vice versa), but
often there are new maps that need new archetypes.  So in some sense, it makes
sense to more tightly couple the archs with the maps.  And like the client, the
maps/archs could also be broken off and maintained by someone else and releases
made when they feel like it.

 I don't know if it make sense to include the editor into the archs/devel
release unless it is made a stand alone program (right now, editor uses the
crosslib, and there are certain advantages of the same configure process
dealing with all of that).

 But if this does come to pass, then it probably makes sense that the sub
distribution type is more important than the specific version information (this
would make it easier to see what the latest version of the specific sub
distribution is since there could in theory by half a dozen map distributions
with varying version numbers before a server release or something.



-- 

-- Mark Wedel
mark@pyramid.com
-
[you can put yourself on the announcement list only or unsubscribe altogether
by sending an email stating your wishes to crossfire-request@ifi.uio.no]