Re: Proposal: enable accessibility by default for GNOME

[Kjartan Maraas <kmaraas broadpark no>]

ma., 08.09.2008 kl. 21.39 +0300, skrev Claudio Saavedra:
> El mié, 30-07-2008 a las 15:56 -0500, Diego Escalante Urrelo escribió:
> > On 7/30/08, Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 12:00 -0400, Willie Walker wrote:
> > >  > Hi All:
> > >  >
> > >  > I recently had a nice discussion with the release team about the
> > >  > viability of enabling accessibility (i.e., the AT-SPI infrastructure)
> > >  > by
> > >  > default for GNOME.  As a result of that discussion, I'm approaching
> > >  > the
> > >  > broader GNOME community with a proposal to do this.  :-)
> > >
> > >
> > > I'd agree if you can show that there's little to no performance hit from
> > >  enabling it. I'd go even further and say that we should not make it
> > >  possible to disable it within the UI if you can show that it won't have
> > >  adverse effects on most users (that don't need a11y...).
> > >
> > 
> > I have froze my whole session by getting the at-spi stuff to crash.
> > More concrete examples include eog not loading images anymore after
> > crashing at.
> > And I gotta say my crashes were random, happened in 2.20, 2.22.
> 
> That's  http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=547373
> 
> There's also this ugly emacs+metacity+a11y lock, that makes my computer
> unusable. I think I hadn't noticed this before because I was using some
> emacs snapshot, but now I switched laptops and haven't got the time to
> compile it...
> 
>   http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=392889
> 
> 
> I haven't experienced more issues so far, but that's enough for me. I'm
> disabling it.
> 
I was forced to do the same last time I tried it, and that was a good
while ago. We should definitely spend some time figuring that one out.

Cheers
Kjartan