Difference between revisions of "Talk:Platforms"
Spookypeanut (talk | contribs) |
m (Linux/UNIX?) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
We should extend/unify all platform pages to a degree, I think. Besides the "port status" template box, it would be nice if each port page contained at least three sections: A short "about" section which briefly describes the port (using a custom backend, or just a recompiled version using SDL?); an "Installation" section; and an "external resources" section. Additional content (including port specific FAQs, list of supported devices etc.) are welcome, too, of course. [[User:Fingolfin|Fingolfin]] 12:49, 18 December 2007 (CET) | We should extend/unify all platform pages to a degree, I think. Besides the "port status" template box, it would be nice if each port page contained at least three sections: A short "about" section which briefly describes the port (using a custom backend, or just a recompiled version using SDL?); an "Installation" section; and an "external resources" section. Additional content (including port specific FAQs, list of supported devices etc.) are welcome, too, of course. [[User:Fingolfin|Fingolfin]] 12:49, 18 December 2007 (CET) | ||
: Here, here. As I suggested in the Compiling discussion page, I feel all information about a port should be easily accessible from these pages, and that would include making the pages easy to use. | : Here, here. As I suggested in the Compiling discussion page, I feel all information about a port should be easily accessible from these pages, and that would include making the pages easy to use. [[User:Spookypeanut|Spookypeanut]] 22:20, 7 January 2008 (CET) | ||
I see that Linux has two entries in the platform tables. It is listed under UNIX (which is not strictly correct) with the SDL backend and has its own entry with a X11/OSS audio backend. I find this a bit confusing. First is this true there are two different backends that are still supported for Linux? And if this is true, shouldn't the two backends be listed for the Linux entry rather than list Linux twice with two different backend? Or maybe list Linux twice on its own rather than having it once on its own and once with UNIX? [[User:Criezy|Criezy]] 22:43, 3 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
:I rectified the [[Linux]] port page, this should clear things up, I hope. As it stands, I would also opt to change the name from Linux to X11 or something different. -- [[User:Lightkey|Lightkey]] 23:10, 23 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
Should the packagers (does that word exists?) be listed in the "port status" template box for each platform? Currently only the backend maintainer(s) are listed. [[User:Criezy|Criezy]] 23:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
: I think it makes a lot of sense, since there are several ports that use the same backends, both backend maintainers and packagers should be credited. I'll add that field. [[User:Jvprat|jvprat]] 19:01, 5 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
Any news about cleaning this page? A way to synchronize both the downloads page and this could be nice. I updated the references to OS/2, as it got an 1.1.1 port :) [[User:Timofonic|Timofonic]] 12:11, 5 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 23:10, 23 June 2011
The Maemo / Nokia 770 port is missing, it seems. Also, should we attempt to order the table, e.g. by alphabet (possibly leaving the "major three" at the start) ? Fingolfin 11:11, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
We should extend/unify all platform pages to a degree, I think. Besides the "port status" template box, it would be nice if each port page contained at least three sections: A short "about" section which briefly describes the port (using a custom backend, or just a recompiled version using SDL?); an "Installation" section; and an "external resources" section. Additional content (including port specific FAQs, list of supported devices etc.) are welcome, too, of course. Fingolfin 12:49, 18 December 2007 (CET)
- Here, here. As I suggested in the Compiling discussion page, I feel all information about a port should be easily accessible from these pages, and that would include making the pages easy to use. Spookypeanut 22:20, 7 January 2008 (CET)
I see that Linux has two entries in the platform tables. It is listed under UNIX (which is not strictly correct) with the SDL backend and has its own entry with a X11/OSS audio backend. I find this a bit confusing. First is this true there are two different backends that are still supported for Linux? And if this is true, shouldn't the two backends be listed for the Linux entry rather than list Linux twice with two different backend? Or maybe list Linux twice on its own rather than having it once on its own and once with UNIX? Criezy 22:43, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- I rectified the Linux port page, this should clear things up, I hope. As it stands, I would also opt to change the name from Linux to X11 or something different. -- Lightkey 23:10, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Should the packagers (does that word exists?) be listed in the "port status" template box for each platform? Currently only the backend maintainer(s) are listed. Criezy 23:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- I think it makes a lot of sense, since there are several ports that use the same backends, both backend maintainers and packagers should be credited. I'll add that field. jvprat 19:01, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Any news about cleaning this page? A way to synchronize both the downloads page and this could be nice. I updated the references to OS/2, as it got an 1.1.1 port :) Timofonic 12:11, 5 May 2010 (UTC)