On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 22:55:29 -0400 Richard wrote: > The question is not whether ScummVM false into the category of "0 free > games need it" or "1 or more free games need it".
agreed - but there are good reasons to prefer the logical approach for one, decisions based on logic are objectively verifiable, and they can be decided in a finite amount of time - decisions relying on judgments are subjective, and can drag on indefinitely - if decisions must be re-evaluated for every similar instance, it becomes a sisyphusian task - that is quite important when we are dealing with a pool of many thousands of softwares, any of which may have subjective criticisms secondly, the subjective approach is what we have now, with common issues going unresolved for years - it is also, why we have FSDG distros arriving at conflicting conclusions, regarding which software are fit and which are not On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 22:55:29 -0400 Richard wrote: > The question is whether the free games that need ScummVM are > significant enpugh to change the judgment from "basically this is a > way of running old nonfree games" to "this makes senss in the Free > World." my opinion is even simpler - ScummVM is not significant enough to warrant a single word of this discussion i can understand the need of that deliberation for popular or "high-profile" software - i propose that the microsoft dotnet suite is one of those, which has never been discussed - it would pass the threshold of "1 or more free clients exist"; but "does the free world need it?" is dubious and highly subjective if taken on a one-by-one basis, this discussion is exemplary of the inefficiency of the subjective approach, per the desirability/work-load ratio, which i use to decide which to keep, which to fix, and which to discard - discussions such as this, weigh in on the work-load factor, while the desirability of ScummVM decreases with each passing "gaming aeon" (roughly 5 years)
