Hi all, Thank you for your comments and submission. Takashi Iwai wrote:
OK, so judging from you and Marguerite's comments, we can take the patch as is for now. But I suggest to makes easier to strip it off, e.g. via %if %with_fcitx or such.
OK, I see. Weng Xuetian wrote:
Yes, fcitx will release new patch against every new mozc release, it's supported by fcitx upstream.
I'll check the fcitx website before updating the package. Marguerite Su wrote:
Fcitx-mozc is also essential for some group of fcitx Japanese users. I think as packagers we have no obvious reason to drop a successful and well-maintained feature. by adding it, fcitx OBS maintainers will also have to maintain mozc, there're 4 active maintainers on OBS, personally I think it's good to add maintianers to such a essential package.
but please do not publish an untested package. I usually try to test for more than a week in daily use. It is fragile package and its upstream release sometimes contains experimental features. Since there are no openSUSE's official mozc package, many people install mozc and ibus-mozc from M17N repository. Takashi Iwai wrote:
Hm, let's see whether this is feasible. It's a backend-integration part, thus it includes lots of internal headers. It might be that we'll end up with packaging all internal headers into mozc-devel package or such...
I think it is frontend like ibus-mozc or mozc_emacs_helper rather than backend-integration. I have not read the headers in detail but the binaries created by the sources added by the patch seems to be linked to the common static libraries for mozc client. They might be implemented modularly. Weng Xuetian wrote:
3. mozc will not become a standalone library in near future (Though I tried to ask them to do so).
This one? http://code.google.com/p/mozc/issues/detail?id=124 I guess the maintainer did not understand what you want to do and benefits to the upstream unfortunately. # Even if he did, the answer might be same.
For other distribution, debian and fedora, also include uim-mozc, which is not mozc upstream too.
I could not find uim-mozc in Fedora. http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=mozc.git Best regards, Fuminobu TAKEYAMA (2012/04/18 17:48), Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Wed, 18 Apr 2012 17:40:40 +0900, Satoru Matsumoto wrote:
Weng Xuetian wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Marguerite Su<i@marguerite.su> wrote:
2012/4/18 Fuminobu TAKEYAMA<ftake@geeko.jp>:
Anyway, I would like to roll back for now because mozc is now really essential package for Japanese users. If the patch is the best solution and users need fcitx support, shall we add the patch again?
Fcitx-mozc is also essential for some group of fcitx Japanese users. I think as packagers we have no obvious reason to drop a successful and well-maintained feature. by adding it, fcitx OBS maintainers will also have to maintain mozc, there're 4 active maintainers on OBS, personally I think it's good to add maintianers to such a essential package.
openSUSE is the best distro that fcitx supports. fcitx developers are also on OBS( home:csslayer:fcitx* ). so there's no need to worry the unmaintained thing that early. it really hurts someone's feeling.
One thing I concern is, whether you fcitx guys have tested / will test the patched mozc packages in combination with ibus as well or not. If not, testing phase might be needed before release, because most Japanese users use mozc in combination with ibus ATM.
Looking at the patch, I guess it would rarely influence on other backends, but yes, it's a good point. More test coverages would be better.
In general, you can use freely M17N:Devel subproject for such a testing purpose. Ask people testing packages on M17N:Devel, at least for regression tests, then move up to M17N. This is a safer procedure.
thanks,
Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-m17n+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-m17n+owner@opensuse.org