Re: Some points about IM integration
- From: Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>
- To: Justin Wong <bigeagle xdlinux info>
- Cc: desktop-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Some points about IM integration
- Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 19:08:15 +0100
On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 01:41 +0800, Justin Wong wrote:
> Sorry for being mad, no offence to u.
> First I would say I approve GNOME to integrate with an IMF, and even
> choose one IMF as defualt.
> BUT, IMF must be switchable.
We already mentioned that we want the features to be in the engines from
each framework, if there needs to be multiple engines. Swappable IMFs
just means more unreproduceable bugs, more moving parts so more bugs in
general and a bad out-of-the-box experience.
> As I have said for several times, provide a interface that IMFs can be
> well integrated with GNOME.
Whether IMFs or something, you cannot add more options, have more moving
parts and have less bugs. In fact, you'd end up with the bugs from all
> There is a solution too satisfy multipul IMFs, but our points' are
> just Ignored , even though Wen Xuetian has said he can prove it with
Your points aren't ignored. We already explained why we don't want
multiple IMFs for GNOME.
> GNOME provide machanism, IMFs provide implementation.
> It's not time to discuss WHICH IMF should be integrated, it's time to
> discuss HOW IMF can be integrated.
> I know it will not be a easy job, but it's something that should be
> Whichever IMF u now choose as the only IMF for gnome, u are KILLING
> othe IMFs, so do u think other IMFs' developers work worth nothing?
The other IMFs will likely continue to exist. They will require users to
make changes to their systems to use them (just like right now if you're
not using the default IMF for your distribution), and you won't have
integrated preferences (just like right now).
> PLEASE, calm down, slow down, and discuss about how to provide a
> machanism, and how IMFs can be integrated.
If we choose to merge integration based on IBus (because of a variety of
reasons), then two things can happen:
- Developers of other Input Frameworks can start creating patches to the
upstream GNOME to provide a better integration than the default choice.
- They choose to start working on the selected IMF because it's the
- They choose to concentrate on other desktops
In all cases, the implementation will evolve, and the integration will
get better. I don't want to have the choice between 2 equally badly
integrated IMFs for GNOME.
] [Thread Prev