Re: [TuxKart-devel] Some notes

[Pascal G. <pa...@gu...>]

>  James enumerated 5 reasons for the use of SDL. My point was just 
> that it is stupid to say that it should be used because everyone has 
> it.

To some's opinion, SDL just answer various needs in order to improve tuxkart.
To Steve's point of view, it's possible to improve tuxkart without SDL since
some of those "needs" aren't that important.

I can not comment on many issues, but i think it would be nice to be able to
play fullscreen in 320x240 [on slow PCs].

>  Anyway, you say dependencies is not a «bad thing». You do have to 
> agree, that even if it is in a very small degree, it is not really 
> that good. Dependencies mean bigger binaries, might have portability 
> problems and the ask for more maintenance.

Bigger binairies, as long as the binairies are staticly linked.
I agree that staticly linked binairies are usually bigger because the libs
they depend on have more features than needed.

IMHO, the issue here is that Steve believes we can achieve everything we need
with Plib.

Still, i think SDL isn't a portability issue as libsdl is available in debian
for 11 architectures¹.

As to either it needs more maintenance or not, it surely needs more.
But some suggested (previously on this list) that someone else than Steve
would maintain the non-Plib stuff. I might have misunderstood the msg behind:
"If you can maintain the PLIB side of those IFDEFS then everybody will be happy.".

-Pascal
¹ http://packages.debian.org/stable/libs/libsdl1.2debian
or more generally:
http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl?keywords=libsdl&searchon=names&subword=1&version=all&release=all
--
Projet MoviXMaker (http://sv.gnu.org/projects/movixmaker)
Projet [e]MoviX[2] (http://movix.sf.net) 
Debian Project (http://www.debian.org)
TuxKart (Wiki (GOTM): http://netpanzer.berlios.de/tuxkart/index.php)