[Games] Status update

[Miriam Ruiz]

2008/11/28 Richard Hartmann <richih.mailinglist at gmail.com>:

> Yah, that is the beauty of it. As we are basically secondary
> upstream, we get rid of a lot of problems. People are welcome
> to maintain the rest of whatever they need in there as well, though.
>
> It should be one patch per feature. No matter if it spans one or
> a hundred files. Patches which accumulate several features should
> be split, if possible.
>
> The layout I have in mind is along those lines. It assumes that
> two projects use the repo in question to manage their specific
> stuff. Note that those are not directories but git branches (which
> is where git is really really nice...)
>
> upstream foo
> \- upstream 1.0
> |\- patchset for 1.0
> ||\- distribution foo
> |||- distribution bar
> |- upstream 1.95
>  \-patchset for 1.95

git would definitely help with this approach: one feature per branch

>> Will do, actually I'm the one who made amd64 fixes for FreeBSD port
>> of hex-a-hop.
>
> Neat :)

We have done a really serious development in i18n and translation of
hex-a-hop in Debian, it is really worth to look at our patches for
that game.

Greetings,
Miry