--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Xonotic |
|
Date: |
Sat, 3 Mar 2018 23:34:27 +0000 |
This adds xonotic. I'm not sure about the "x11" license part.
In general it works.
--
A88C8ADD129828D7EAC02E52E22F9BBFEE348588
https://n0.is/~ng0
0001-gnu-Add-xonotic.patch
Description: Text document
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: [bug#30693] Xonotic |
|
Date: |
Sat, 26 May 2018 18:25:05 +0200 |
I pushed the patch with two minor changes (licenses, invoke instead of
system for xonotic-data). Thanks again!
I didn't open a new bug, no.
I agree it's a shame about patches sometimes being in limbo for so
long. I don't see a solution other than to try to get more people
involved in Guix.
On Fri, 25 May 2018 16:52:54 +0000
Nils Gillmann <address@hidden> wrote:
> Rutger Helling transcribed 1.1K bytes:
> > This patch has been open for quite a while! Which is a shame
> > because it works well.
> >
> > The license talked about seems to be GPL2+, see this commit:
> >
> > https://github.com/xonotic/xonotic/commit/12105b36a21e7472f72933b6dd409465b5133396
> >
> > They recently changed it to GPL3+, but this current release in the
> > patch is still GPL2+.
> >
> > Is it alright if I make those changes in the licenses and push?
>
> The software would still be GPL2+. Only when we use the new one
> it will be GPL3+.
>
> As long as you keep my copyright and add yours its fine for me
> (I worked some time to get this working).
>
> Offtopic:
> Did you open a new issue number to reference the old number?
> I was able to see threading in notmuch but not in my actual
> email client.
>
> Ontopic:
> I continued working on this in a version which only applies to
> my work. A friend reported to me that there are issues with
> one or two of the 3 possible runtime modes which should be
> fixed.
>
> Offtopic:
> I've had some patches open waiting for months (after 3 months
> I stopped counting), so for now I only submit what's necessary
> and still (freshly) applies.
> FYI, the vim-build-system is working just fine and
> I'm integrating it in my part of the software already. It just
> seems like we have no people at all interested (or with time
> on their hands) to review Vim related code.
> This is no critique on work done by mostly volunteers, but we
> could do better. It's not criticism because I have no constructive
> ideas how it could be managed better.
pgpjo3vfLQLr4.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--- End Message ---