[Kde-games-devel] Regarding Mancala

[Stefan Majewsky]

Am Montag, 3. Mai 2010 23:51:03 schrieb Mauricio Piacentini:
> So I do not disagree, but I am not sure how we should handle this.
> Maybe it-s is right, and we should simply purge most games and
> implement a new level of quality needed (let us say for 4.6). Then we
> would only have very good games in the module, but I believe only 4 or
> 5 now would make the cut (KPat, KGoldrunner and maybe 2 or 3 more).
> This might not be a bad thing after all, it can be a shake up that
> will produce better stuff in the near future.

I like this idea. In this step, we should also evaluate which parts of 
libkdegames could be deprecated (or even removed; IIRC we do not guarantee 
API/ABI stability of libkdegames for the whole KDE 4 cycle). For example, the 
KGame library could be moved into KSirk's codebase, as this is the only app 
using it (according to both LXR and grep), and KGame is not maintained: The 
log says that the last non-krazy change was 19 months ago.

Also, I'd like to see KGameCanvas games ported to QGV. It's mostly pointless 
to keep two frameworks around, esp. considering the manpower behind QGV. 
Because I know Ian's position on porting KGoldRunner to another rendering 
framework, we could possibly do the same as with KGame/KSirk and move the 
KGameCanvas codebase inside KGoldRunner.

Then there's the GGZ stuff, which only three games are using (KBattleShip, 
KReversi, KSquares). And I never saw it working, perhaps except for the new 
stuff which Josef Spillner was working on before he had no time for it 
anymore.

Any harshness is not intended in these comments, I'm just pointing out that if 
we apply a higher quality standard to the apps, we should do the same for the 
libs, which we need to maintain, too.

Greetings
Stefan