On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 09:44:38AM +0200, Fabian Greffrath wrote: > Is prboom-plus considered the successor of prboom or is it just a > more actively developed fork? In Debian words "Should prboom-plus > have Replaces: prboom"?
It was originally a fork of prboom maintained by someone completely independently of prboom. It later moved into the prboom SVN, but is still managed as a separate project. I think there is some cross-pollination and code flows between the two. However, prboom+ make large, sweeping and perhaps 'risky' changes which prboom don't immediately incorporate. IIRC prboom+'s main focus is absolute DOOM.EXE/DOOM2.EXE compatibility, including some crazy/brilliant ideas like simulating the behaviour of buffer overflows and underruns from the DOS environment, so old demos playback perfectly. It has turned out that prboom+ is more actively developed and releases more often than prboom. When I first looked at it, before it moved into the same SVN, it was awkward to build in Linux (the developer being Windows-focussed). That has no doubt changed. > Regarding the packaging: I had a look at the current packaging for > prboom and I am not sure I understand what we do in > debian/fix_upstream.sh and why we do it. Will this be necessary for > prboom-plus as well, could you elaborate a bit on it? I'll take a look, I can't remember what it does :) I had wondered whether this would be an opportunity to use 'git svn clone' on the SVN and keep the full upstream history in VCS, rather than import tarballs. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121022151400.GB6671@debian
