Re: Concerning Keyboard Status Menu

[Ma Xiaojun <damage3025 gmail com>]

On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Mathieu Bridon
<bochecha fedoraproject org> wrote:
> That's all technical problems, they can all be fixed.
>
> "It's hard and will take a long time" is not an excuse for not doing it.

At least it won't happen soon. That's why we should not make
regressions for current IBus, even if you doubt the necessity of
having multiple engines for same Chinese input scheme.

> That's GNOME, not "the IBus platform" as I was responding to, but you
> removed that context from your answer.
>
> And GNOME still is open to third party, you just need to set a configuration
> to true (I'm sure there will be a checkbox in GNOME Tweak Tool before long),
> or actually talk to the GNOME developers about why your engine is important,
> and it will be available by default.
>
> Believe it or not, it actually works, I asked for the specific engines we
> needed in Hong Kong, and Rui made sure they would be white-listed. I didn't
> even have to bribe him or threaten him. :)

I saw that bug report. Why we need to take this bureaucracy of
explicitly asking for white listing? What's good about it?

The only real use of it seems to be block some XKB duplicates. That
can be handled by black listing instead.

As I said, the kind of work flow is indeed *proprietary*. A truly
*open* system (.e.g. Windows) never have such stupid restriction.

And I repeat, property menu is a separate issue that affects supported
engines also. Currently only ibus-anthy probably ibus-hangual has
working menu. ibus-type-booster gives up its menu.

> Well, I'm talking from my experience, not from what I don't know, and in
> Hong Kong, there actually are three "flavors", and that's it. If you do them
> properly (and they are not properly done at the moment), almost nobody will
> look anywhere else.
>
> What I actually find very rude of you is that you seem to somehow interpret
> my messages as having some kind of background intent.
>
> I was asking a question. A real question, because I wanted you to inform me
> on how things are in Mainland China. But you assumed I was just trying to
> undermine your argument and assuming that I was already right, which
> absolutely wasn't the case.
>
> Can we not just have a honest conversation where both parties talk seriously
> and inform each other, instead of interpreting what we think others are
> saying, and calling them "arrogant"?

Simple, there should be no white list filtering of supported engines
and there should be no filtering at all for property menu. Otherwise,
Mainland people won't use IBus with GNOME; people don't like software
having arbitrary regression, period.

Some information in above messages may be kind of off topic.

I do feel that you try hard to defend GNOME's current implementation
rather than thinking about it critically.
That's fine. But I decided to not to waste both of our time to explain
things. If you really want to know why, try the following exercises
first:
Type one paragraph using any Pinyin engine in the following page
http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnome

> If not, I will quietly go back to my work, fix the IBus situation in Hong
> Kong with the help of others in the local community who are eager to do
> stuff instead of complaining on a mailing list, and ignore whatever you're
> saying and doing.

I'm definitely willing to do stuff. But the design is completely wrong here.