Brian White wrote:
> I wasn't aware that the Z-machine knowledge had changed in the past
> half-dozen years or so. The "infocom" program handles all the games
> I've ever tried with it, so I don't see why it is obsolete.
Oh, it works fine in normal cases. But we now understand certain
obscure v5
> Right now, I believe we have an old version of the ITF interpreter in
> the "infocom" package. This should probably be scrapped, as it is
> highly obsolete given our current Z-machine knowledge.
I wasn't aware that the Z-machine knowledge had changed in the past
half-dozen years or so. The "in
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Charles Briscoe-Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi! I subscribed a few days ago, (and have been somewhat overwhelmed
> by the quantity of mail on this list; is there a digestified version?)
> and would like to propose that I package up Inform, Frotz, a
Charles Briscoe-Smith wrote:
> Hi! I subscribed a few days ago, (and have been somewhat overwhelmed
> by the quantity of mail on this list; is there a digestified version?)
> and would like to propose that I package up Inform, Frotz, and some of
> the associated games.
[pro-infocom propaganda snip
>On a related note, games. Games are important. Please please please dont
>reject someone who wants to package up a game. Thats one of the things I
>like about debian, it has so many games. I first got mirrormagic working
>under debian... And I hope to see abuse.svga working again too now that
Brian White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > the list of debian packges needing a new maintainer is growing all the
> > time. so - what about removeing some packages, if they are no longer
> > maintained, or (better) moving them into section contrib (or a new
> > section "orphaned" ?).
>
> There i
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Welton) wrote on 28.05.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> While it would be nice if new developers took over some orphaned packages
> (I plan to), unloading a package on someone that they have no interest in,
> is, IMHO, a bad thing. If they are personally interested in it, th
> Im not dissing your work, its excellent ;) Just hoping things can be a
> little more open... It seems like its getting to be an old boys club.
> You guys are pretty mature compared to the IRC channels, but it seems that
> already the administration is top heavy, taking away a lot of coding/dev
On Wed, 28 May 1997 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On another note. Is your screening process too vigorous? What happened
| to the EPIC irc package that was discussed here a while back? I dont see
| it in the distribution. Perhaps the screening process was too harsh?
I am alive and well, as is my
On Wed, 28 May 1997, Brian White wrote:
> Perhaps we could integrate this with the "new developer" screening. To
> become a new developer, you must take over one of the orphaned packages.
This idea was raised before. *please*. Do not do this. If you have some
enthusiastic developer come alon
> the list of debian packges needing a new maintainer is growing all the
> time. so - what about removeing some packages, if they are no longer
> maintained, or (better) moving them into section contrib (or a new
> section "orphaned" ?).
There is a "project/orphaned" directory where things can be
On May 27, Vincent Renardias wrote
>
> On Tue, 27 May 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
>
> > > The new section should appear in the archive under the directory
> > > "project/orpahned". It will store the binary/sources of orphaned
> > > packages, but also the bug reports of the dropped packages.
On Tue, 27 May 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
> > The new section should appear in the archive under the directory
> > "project/orpahned". It will store the binary/sources of orphaned
> > packages, but also the bug reports of the dropped packages.
>
> But please don't mix "orphaned" packages w
On Tue, 27 May 1997, Vincent Renardias wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 May 1997, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
>
> > the list of debian packges needing a new maintainer is growing all the
> > time. so - what about removeing some packages, if they are no longer
> > maintained, or (better) moving them into sec
On Tue, 27 May 1997, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> the list of debian packges needing a new maintainer is growing all the
> time. so - what about removeing some packages, if they are no longer
> maintained, or (better) moving them into section contrib (or a new
> section "orphaned" ?).
This is e
15 matches
Mail list logo
