Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Discussion among members of the development team.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Post Reply
User avatar
Pentarctagon
Project Manager
Posts: 4361
Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
Location: Earth (occasionally)

Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Post by Pentarctagon »

As of #4446, which was merged into 1.15 and backported to 1.14, a new column will be populated by wesnothd for clients that connect to the official multiplayer server. The motivation for this change is that a question has come up during discussions more than once regarding how many players get Wesnoth from one source vs another - SourceForge, Steam, software repositories, etc - and this would be able to provide us some actual data to look at (at least as far as players who use the official multiplayer server).

The value that is to be stored for the client's source is read from the file <root wesnoth directory>/data/dist. If the file is not present, or contains an invalid value, then the value of Default will be sent to wesnothd. The list of valid values is:
  • Default
  • Steam
  • SourceForge
  • Flatpak
  • macOS App Store
  • Linux repository
  • iOS
  • Android
  • BSD repository
What this means for packagers
During packaging, please create the data/dist file with the appropriate value :)
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code

User avatar
josteph
Developer
Posts: 741
Joined: August 19th, 2017, 6:58 pm

Re: Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Post by josteph »

Suggest to add Other as a valid value.

User avatar
Pentarctagon
Project Manager
Posts: 4361
Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
Location: Earth (occasionally)

Re: Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Post by Pentarctagon »

That's basically what Default covers, though - any situation where the provided options are missing, invalid, or don't apply.
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code

Shiki
Developer
Posts: 293
Joined: July 13th, 2015, 9:53 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Post by Shiki »

Default

Linux repository
That's not going to work well. Packagers won't know about this unless some drastic measures like build failure happen without them setting this. We don't have contact to them, nor do I expect them to read this topic. To make matters worse, while @Packagers are pinged upon tagging,I remember no release where our Debian packager was pinged – the only Linux packager I know of to be in the chat.
Archlinux for example is setting the location of manpages explicitly. That dates back to a bug in the cmake script in 1.8 — a decade ago.

Assuming Linux/BSD repository as default is more realistic – all the other channels we have control over.

User avatar
Pentarctagon
Project Manager
Posts: 4361
Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
Location: Earth (occasionally)

Re: Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Post by Pentarctagon »

Yeah, that's a fair point. I was thinking that wouldn't cover people who self-compile, for example, but the number of people who do that on Windows/macOS is probably very small.
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code

User avatar
octalot
Developer
Posts: 477
Joined: July 17th, 2010, 7:40 pm

Re: Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Post by octalot »

Is it a problem when packagers don't change the default? I mean, we'd still know that "Linux repository" means "distribution whose maintainer does trigger this", and "Default" is "self-builders and distributions whose maintainers don't trigger this".

User avatar
Pentarctagon
Project Manager
Posts: 4361
Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
Location: Earth (occasionally)

Re: Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Post by Pentarctagon »

According to Iris (from Discord):
Iris wrote:Pentarctagon: I'm pretty sure Rhonda handles both Debian and Ubuntu
So I'll probably open up a FR or a bug for Arch once 1.14.10 gets released. I'm not planning on hunting down the maintainers of other distros further though.
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code

User avatar
GunChleoc
Translator
Posts: 487
Joined: September 28th, 2012, 7:35 am
Contact:

Re: Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Post by GunChleoc »

You could send an e-mail to packagers. See https://repology.org/project/wesnoth/versions for a list ;)

User avatar
Pentarctagon
Project Manager
Posts: 4361
Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
Location: Earth (occasionally)

Re: Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Post by Pentarctagon »

I mean, even based on that list, the large majority are either Debian, Ubuntu, Arch, or don't have any maintainer information listed there.
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code

User avatar
Iris
Site Administrator
Posts: 6675
Joined: November 14th, 2006, 5:54 pm
Location: Chile
Contact:

Re: Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Post by Iris »

Author of the unofficial UtBS sequels Invasion from the Unknown and After the Storm.

User avatar
Pentarctagon
Project Manager
Posts: 4361
Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
Location: Earth (occasionally)

Re: Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Post by Pentarctagon »

Well, I guess I'll just use that then :oops:
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code

User avatar
josteph
Developer
Posts: 741
Joined: August 19th, 2017, 6:58 pm

Re: Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Post by josteph »

Shiki wrote:
November 26th, 2019, 1:53 pm
To make matters worse, while @Packagers are pinged upon tagging,I remember no release where our Debian packager was pinged – the only Linux packager I know of to be in the chat.
Rhonda can configure her IRC client to highlight on @Packagers. It's pretty easy to do this in most clients.

Tad_Carlucci
Developer
Posts: 503
Joined: April 24th, 2016, 4:18 pm

Re: Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Post by Tad_Carlucci »

In my experience, there is no way to ensure all packagers get notified _and_pay_attention_.

I'm in the "make it a build error" camp. Sure, that means everyone, not just packagers, have a new step, but the other choice is to set a default. Setting a default means it'll never be changed. Which is the same as not bothering with the feature at all.
I forked real life and now I'm getting merge conflicts.

User avatar
Pentarctagon
Project Manager
Posts: 4361
Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
Location: Earth (occasionally)

Re: Packaging changes for 1.14.10 and 1.15.3

Post by Pentarctagon »

Given the position packagers are in, I'd expect that making it an error to not have a value set would simply be patched out anyway.
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code

Post Reply