Debian Package for showeq-5.0.0.11

[debian-package]

After lurking on the forum, I've noticed a lot of questions on how to compile, patch, checkout showeq.

Most (all?) of the packages are rpm based and look like Redhat is the main distro.

Since I didn't see any official debian package, I've created a debianized version and made the packages available here:

deb ftp://ftp.real-time.com/linux/real-time unstable custom
deb-src ftp://ftp.real-time.com/linux/real-time unstable custom

For the debian die-hard, I'm not an official debian packager, so I'm working through my mentor to get the packages into the official debian repository.

Once the packages are in the official repository, I'll post here on how to use debian's bug tracking system (BTS) and debian's package tracking system (PTS) so we can keep track of feedback on the package.

[Cryonic]

So now we'll have even more places that bugs get posted to?

The purpose of not providing a binary package or most times even a source tarball to download is part of the barrier to entry for people using this application.

[debian-package]

So now we'll have even more places that bugs get posted to?
Poor attitude. Nothing kills a project faster then being critical of someone new contributing to your project in a public forum.

As an aside, if showeq provided an adequate bug tracker (bugzilla?) it would be a non-issue.

Regardless, anything posted to the BTS is a debian -package- specific bug and I'll be responsible for it.

I'll work with the submitter of the bug/issue and potentially the upstream authors to resolve issues.

If the bugs is debian specific, the upstream authors will never hear about it. I'll be responsible for fixing the debian package and releasing it to the user base.

If the bug is from the upstream code, the upstream authors will interface with me and I'll interface with the submitter, so upstream authors will get to work with someone who "gets it" (me) not a newbie user.

8/10 times the upstream authors get a detailed bug report with a patch. For the times that I cannot solve the problem, I'll give a very detailed bug report and I'll be resposible for integrating the patch from upstream back into the debian package.

My goal is to let upstream developers write code and let the support structure of the debian project (which includes myself) support the users.


The purpose of not providing a binary package or most times even a source tarball to download is part of the barrier to entry for people using this application.
Well, that's a new one for me.

Trying to limit the people that can use an open source project just seems wrong (imho).

Maybe making it easier for people to install, report bugs, and upgrade will help reduce the FAQs I see posted to the forum and allow the upstream developers to spend more time writing code then hand-holding newbies.

All I ask is give the debian support structure a try, let me help the showeq project the best way I know how.

-IF- it doesn't work for the upstream developers I can remove the package from public view and we'll be back to where we are today.

[splooge]

Ignore Cryonic. He's "old think." He's probably still bitter about the fact that MySEQ ever existed and that LibEQ was opened up.

[purple]

Heh if you wanna handle all the bitching when a patch breaks seq, but it doesn't get fixed for a couple days or more, more power to you. The concept of "upstream developers" is kinda nebulous around here though.

This project stays alive because it is useful, though, not because of being friendly and nice to every random person who comes by. There's no restricting who can use it, but like Crynonic said, there is a technical barrier to entry. I would estimate a lot of users just barely make it over that, based on the number of people who don't have the slightest idea how to apply a patch when one gets posted after an eq update that breaks skittles or whatnot.

For the most part, people around here want to keep a low profile. I'm kinda new, but I get the feeling it is mostly because everyone is scared to death that encryption changes will come down the pike and the serious developers who can deal with that kind of stuff have moved on. Most of us are very thankful for the people who take the time to decipher opcodes and hack in struct changes. The last thing anyone is going to do is look at some bugzilla that says that maps load twice, QT docking sucks ass, and that a long list of things don't work because of changes to what gets streamed to the client. We all know that. But the skittles work and well, yay!

But again, I'm new around here. That's just my opinion.

[Cryonic]

Trying to limit the people that can use an open source project just seems wrong (imho).

Maybe making it easier for people to install, report bugs, and upgrade will help reduce the FAQs I see posted to the forum and allow the upstream developers to spend more time writing code then hand-holding newbies.

It may seem wrong to you, but at the same time has its advantages, like a single point that needs to be fixed to get things working. If you look, most of the FAQs were not written by "upstream developers" but instead by users. Up until a recent change at SF.net, the main FAQ (that has resurfaced lately) was doing quite well at keeping the newbie hand-holding to a minimum.


Ignore Cryonic. He's "old think." He's probably still bitter about the fact that MySEQ ever existed and that LibEQ was opened up.

Actually I'm greatful for the rise of MySEQ due to the type of individuals that it dragged away from here. As for libEQ.a being opened up... well, the reason for it being closed went away when the encryption was made difficult enough to require a key sniffer on the EQ box to get SEQ working (and was also the reason for the introduction of MySEQ).

[fryfrog]

As a counter point, there is a gentoo package available too... but it is a source based distro. I think at one time, someone may have actually kept debian packages up to date too... casey maybe? Its been a while.

I think most of the major "issues" have been pointed out for why there are typically no binary packages available. The really big one is that at any given point, showeq may or may not work. And since this is based on Sony's patch schedule and the users / developers here... it can be quite random.

I personally would not want to support a package that could stop working at any moment, through no fault of the project developers.

On the flip side... the number of people running debian and eq is probably going to be pretty small. The number of people running debian w/o the ability to actually compile seq on their own is going to be even smaller. The number of people running debian, playing eq who have NOT already got seq installed... well, you get my point.

Debian and Gentoo (imho) have pretty high level of entry requirements for its usage. This is nothing like an rpm package being released which would cator (sp?) to the "masses" (redhat, mandrake, suse, etc...) who some how managed through the GUI installer, play EQ and know about showeq. Most of these people are at MySEQ for sure... easily seen by the huge decrease in traffic here :)

If maintaining the package is something you think you will enjoy and/or don't mind doing... I say (as someone with no authority!) go for it!

[debian-package]

Since I didn't see any official debian package, I've created a debianized version and made the packages available here:

deb ftp://ftp.real-time.com/linux/real-time unstable custom
deb-src ftp://ftp.real-time.com/linux/real-time unstable custom.
Just put up showeq_5.0.0.11-2_i386.deb, nothing earth shattering, just some internal changes recommended by my debian-mentor.

The .changes file is attached.