Re: [opensuse-m17n] Re: A patch added to mozc by submit-request 114205

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Marguerite Su wrote:

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Takashi Iwai wrote:

...

At Wed, 18 Apr 2012 15:03:04 +0800, Weng Xuetian wrote:

...

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Marguerite Su wrote:

...

2012/4/18 Fuminobu TAKEYAMA :

...

Hi, Marguerite Su and M17N maintainers,

I am confused by the big patch for Fcitx added to the mozc package yesterday without any reviews and discussion.

https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/114205

Hi, ftake,

yes, I don't why either, when I created the request, no reviewer is automatically added.

only me, and I have no review option but to accept.

...

My concern is that this patch decrease maintainability of that package.

As you know, Mozc's release cycle is very short. Who will maintain the patch? Will Fcitx maintainers (including the patch developer?) release new patch for every Mozc release? I cannot think they will do so, as long as I read their website.

Fcitx developers and maintainers will do.

I think you just see http://code.google.com/p/fcitx/download. actually it's their "release" website. fcitx-mozc is fast developed at https://github.com/fcitx/fcitx-mozc

...

This is why the openSUSE packaging policy says "Ask upstream first", right?

absolutely right, but this time it's Fcitx upstream developers that asked me to add so.

...

It is, however, good news that fcitx support Mozc. I guess this can be demonstrated by creating separated OBS package like fcitx-mozc if some header files of mozc are packaged.

yes, I'm glad to say Mozc users have a third input method to taste.

it's not possible I have to say. you know how Mozc is developed and packaged. there's actually no such header file. fcitx in M17N has many derivatives, and it has a not-released-yet fcitx-anthy in home:opensuse_zh. if it could be done that way, it would already be done. I bcc-ed fcitx core developer, and he'll explain that tech thing in detail.

...

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.

...

-- Fuminobu TAKEYAMA

Hi, I'm one of the fcitx developer.

For your question: Yes, fcitx will release new patch against every new mozc release, it's supported by fcitx upstream.

There is several reason that I can't and don't want to make fcitx-mozc upstream. 1. mozc is not open developed, though it's open source. 2. different release schedule might be conflict with each other, the best solution from my point of view is develop outside mozc. 3. mozc will not become a standalone library in near future (Though I tried to ask them to do so).

For the patch, it only adds new file, and will not break any existing things.

For other distribution, debian and fedora, also include uim-mozc, which is not mozc upstream too. Add fcitx-mozc for debian is also on the way. They also use the patch in order to get uim compiled, that's another reason that I choose to release patch.

For potential users, I don't want to talk about this too much, but there are request on Fcitx issue list, for adding Japanese support, and anthy development it is said that have moved to mozc, and mozc it much more easy to develop (Even must use some special buildsystem).

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.  Could you resubmit the package in that way?

I'll try. (because I'm not familiar with conditional builds...

...

Also, at the next time, please announce or ask on m17n (or opensuse-factory) ML before doing non-trivial updates like this. Otherwise it'll surprise people unexpectedly.

Basically osc submitreq review is the last step, not the first nor the sole step for integration.  If a new feature is added or a feature is changed, it should be announced to users publicly on ML beforehand.

it's my fault. I don't even know there's a m17n ML before today.

...

thanks,

Takashi

done and I dragged you two into reviewers -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-m17n+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-m17n+owner@opensuse.org