widelands-dev team mailing list archive

[SirVer <916545@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Should we open a new branch for this purpose, or better keep this in
>main trunk to directly force our playtesters to use the new
>implementation once it is in testing stage? ;)
We should use a new branch and merged it back as soon as it is in 
testing stage. We need to force our users to switch asap.

>As my next changes won't break ggz implementation I would vote for main
>trunk. What do YOU think?
see no apparent reason to not work in a branch directly. We will sooner 
or later rip ggz out of the code while players will want to continue GGZ 
for as long as we are not ready for deployment. I am therefore for a 
branch.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Widelands
Developers, which is a bug assignee.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/916545

Title:
  About depending on GGZ packages

Status in Widelands:
  Confirmed
Status in “widelands” package in Debian:
  New

Bug description:
  I noticed a bug report in Debian which basically suggests to drop the
  GGZ packages because it is unmaintained upstreams. Since Widelands
  depends on ggz, this of course affects us there (not to mention Debian
  derivaties like Ubuntu and Linux Mint).

  I know the ggz dependency has been discussed a bit before, but we
  should probably figure out what the long-term plan is.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/widelands/+bug/916545/+subscriptions