On 12/4/06, Simon Roby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/24/06, Christopher Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/24/06, Hans de Goede <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Replacing xmame with an enhanced version of sdlmame and reusing the name /
mailinglist / cvs, etc. Has been disussed before and AFAIK there were no objections
to this. The main thing we need is someone to spearhead this and that someone is not
going to be me as I'm currently rather busy with Fedorta stuff, see:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/HansdeGoede
> >
> > Maybe you are the one? So which pill will it be the red or the blue one?
>
> A lot depends on what type of patches RB/OG will accept. It may be
> better to set up our own svn/cvs/git/whatever to house specific
> patches that RB/OG will not accept.
Are you guys suggesting that Xmame should become a fork of sdlmame?
That doesn't sound like a good idea to me. Doing so would needlessly
split both the sdlmame code and its community. IMHO it would be better
to convince RB to have a more public development cycle, with proper
version control.
Good luck! I for one know that RB thinks you need 6 billion lines of
code and 400,000 separate developers before a project becomes large
enough to warrant the use of a source control system.
_______________________________________________
Xmame mailing list
[email protected]
http://toybox.twisted.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/xmame
