[Bug 2213] Review request: love - A free 2D game engine which enables easy game creation in Lua

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2213

--- Comment #11 from Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede at gmail.com> 2012-03-10 08:28:32 CET ---
Hi,

(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > > Good point, I can rename this to love-freeworld and submit the modified version
> > > to fedora.
> > 
> > Yes and no, the problem is that both versions then will either conflict, or we
> > will need
> > to rename various files inside the packages. IE rename the -freeworld binary to
> > /usr/bin/love-freeworld
> > and I guess have the rest of the files in a love-common package which then
> > would be provided by
> > the Fedora package.
> 
> IMHO adding a "conflicts" tag is better. Why would you want to have both free
> and nonfree versions installed?

Because if there is a Fedora version, then games in Fedora will be tested with
that
version not the freeworld version, the Fedora version may even be a different
version,
or have some bugfixes applied to make a specific game work which have not yet
found there way into the rpmfusion version.

Even more important as rpmfusion we've made the promise that we will never
replace
Fedora packages like for example atrpms does. This has been a very concious
decision
made from day one, this also means no Conflicts.

> What you maybe will want to have are different versions of it installed,
> because some games work only with one of them. I guess this is possible with
> symlinks, like when having several python versions and `python` links to the
> default one.

Right, and if you solve that problem, you probably also have the problem of
having a
freeworld and a regular version installed at the same time solved.

> > I guess the big question is are there a few good Free games using love which
> > can go to Fedora, because if
> > there aren't any I wonder if it is worth the trouble.
> 
> Stabyourself.net games are great, but their license won't fit in Fedora, so
> with an end-user ponit of view, maybe this would not be needed. But then we
> would be forgetting people who may want to develop LÖVE games in Fedora.

I think that if currently there is no suitable content for Fedora, that then it
makes sense
to just have love in rpmfusion for now and don't do a Fedora version.

That still leaves the question of the package name, we could anticipate there
be a
version for Fedora in the future, and name the package love-freeworld. And I
assume
you will be using alternatives to deal with having multiple versions installed
?

If you use alternatives and embed a version in the binary name and let
alternatives manage a symlink to it, then you might as well put freeworld in
the versioned binary name too, then it will be really easy to later add LOVE to
Fedora too.

I also suggest if you want todo multiple version to have a noarch love-common
package with the following files:

%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/scalable/*/*.svg
%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop
%{_datadir}/mime/packages/%{name}.xml

So that these can be shared between all the version. Alternatively you could
let all packages own them but will lead to installation conflicts if one
version has different versions of these files then other versions.

Last I still would like to see some discussion about love being a too generic
name and using love2d as name, at least for the package name.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.