On Dec 13, 2007 12:41 PM, Antti Harri  wrote:

quoted text
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007, Andris wrote:

>

> >> there's already games/prboom, so why another Doom-engine?

> >

> > Because someone ported it?

> >

> > I don't get this "there's already a ported implementation of ".

> > Sounds like monopoly.

> >

> > IMHO, any quality port (as in: compiles, runs fine) should be included.

>

> With a quick glance they seemed quite the same

> and I can say prboom works good, so why not improve

> existing?

>

> I'm not saying it shouldn't be imported, I'm just

> wondering what makes chocolate-doom better than

> existing prboom.

>

> --

> Antti Harri

IMHO, is it not relevant the quality (as in: completeness,

friendliness, or the like) of the port. I *do* find important the

quality of compilation and run.