Re: Some points about IM integration

[Vincent Untz <vuntz gnome org>]

Marguerite,

(First, no need to cc me, I'm obviously subscribed to desktop-devel-list
:-))

Le mardi 15 mai 2012, à 16:40 +0800, Marguerite Su a écrit :
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com> wrote:
> > In general, choice of input method framework is not a goal in itself.
> > If we choose a single input method framework to integrate with GNOME -
> > that doesn't make GNOME like proprietary software from Apple and Microsoft,
> > because GNOME will still be 100% Free Software, and will still be developed
> > in the open by the GNOME community.
> >
> > GNOME doesn't want to work well just for tweakers and enthusiasts - it's
> > very important to the project that GNOME works well for all users without
> > tweaking. We want to give the choice of using Free Software to
> > everybody - this is a much more fundamental form of choice than giving a small
> > group of users the ability to swap out a different input method framework
> > underneath GNOME.
> >
> 
> no offense, but if Chinese or CJK Community is "a small group"(I think
> I've already be clear about what CJK users are doing today. they'are
> the nowadays tweakers you called. why? because you didn't ship what
> they want. you know, IM is the most famous workaround in i18n world),
> GNOME Asia can be shutdown.
> 
> so is Chinese or CJK Community "a small group" or "second class"? say
> that in public in Hong Kong.

I feel you misunderstood what Owen wrote. My understanding is that when
Owen is talking about a small group here, it would only be a small group
because our goal is to have GNOME work well by default for most people,
including most users of the CJK community. If we manage to do that, then
only a small number of people would need to do some changes (like using
a different input method framework).

Now, there's obviously the question of whether this goal is achievable:
can we cover the needs of most users (including most users of the CJK
community) with one input method framework? Some people in this thread
seems to think it's possible, while others believe it's not. I can't
answer this as I've no background on input methods in general.

It would surely help to have some simple wiki page summarizing the
current state of ibus and fctix, both as frameworks in general as well
as for the availability and state of their plugins. People have been
trying to tell the pros and cons of both in various mails, but I don't
think anybody really managed to get a global view because of the number
of mails.

[...]

> > GNOME isn't just a set of parts that a Linux distributor takes and uses
> > to create a working system - we also take responsibility for creating
> > a fully working system. This means deciding how GNOME interacts with
> > system components like sound and networking and printing and when necessary
> > enhancing those components to provide the right experience to the user.
> 
> yes and no. your will is good and respectful.
> 
> but have you ever discussed it with downstream distributions?
> 
> I cc-ed openSUSE GNOME Community leader, Vincent, to see what he will
> think on this.

Hrm, I'm not sure what you expect me to say here :-) This is the way
GNOME has been working for a while. For instance, this is why GNOME has
tight integration with NetworkManager and PulseAudio. Of course, this
raises challenges for integrators downstream (as well as for some
advanced users) and I'm very well aware of this. But we feel (where "we"
= GNOME) it helps us build a better user experience.

Cheers,

Vincent

-- 
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.