Re: GNOME 2.4.1 and 2.5 schedule

[Callum <callum physics otago ac nz>]

> Although as developers the taste in games of this list might not be the
> same as the average user, it is worth considering what we enjoy to play,
> and what we don't and then axe the crap. So I took upon myself the
> arduous task of playing and evaluating all of Applications->Games.

What gets kept and what gets thrown isn't exactly the question though,
it's what the focus of the package is. Is it:

a) A select few games of very high quality.
b) An accumulating collection of games that grows with time (the status
   quo)
c) b split into separate packages.
d) A continuously evolving collection of games (i.e. we both accept and
   remove games at a high rate).
e) What we have now, but frozen and slowly polished over time.

And to answer this you need to answer the question of why we have a games
package at all and what it's place in a desktop is. This sends you
straight onto the "what is a desktop" thread from hell.

Personally I would like a) and I've sort of been moving that way via
e). Everyone with a cool new game wants d) but believes they are giving us
a). c) heads towards a) anyway since the non-core packages will be
largely ignored.

While a) is best it is difficult for political and practical
reasons.   For example the author of gnect is still interested in it, but
judging by the bug reports (or lack thereof) no one plays it.

So the big question for this list is:

What do we want from gnome-games ?

And yes, I'm prepared to keep maintaining it regardless.

 - Callum