[Mageia-dev] GNOME plans

Mon Jun 4 16:24:30 CEST 2012

On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 09:13:53PM +0800, Kira wrote:
+> Well, I think the main point of arguing about this issue is that most
+> people is mostly used to other input method and they don't care about
+> iBus...
+> 
+> Still 2 points to be answered especially for Mageia here:
+> 
+> 1. In MCC, we can set up the input method in localedrake, and this
+> setting would be system-wide except GNOME about 3.6+. This should be
+> mentioned, because it would destroy the unified user experience.
+
+As said, I don't code. And unified experience I care for GNOME, that it
+works consistently. I care about freedesktop.org standards. I don't care
+for differences between distributions. E.g. MCC is great, but I prefer
+if it didn't exist. MCC is only Mageia/Mandriva, another distro has
+other things, etc.
+I prefer something in gnome-control-center.
+
+> 2. For users who want other input method, is there a easy way to do it?
+> I must remind here: I think most developer in GNOME don't really know the
+> pain for our CJK user here. Whether iBus or other input method all
+> don't meet the completeness that most people need. iBus continuously
+> lost the word typed, Hime/GCIN, and others more don't have easy way to
+> add up other input module, and scim/oxim... and more are even out of
+> maintenance.
+
+iBus losing words sounds like something fixable.  Fairly strange that it
+does that though.
+
+And that most developers don't know much about CJK, agreed. That's why
+it is important to figure it out. I even have less of a grasp, as not a
+coder/developer.
+
+> The main point of issue is that we hope to have the freedom and have
+> the input method that fit each other's need( There's at least 10+
+> input modules exist), and the way GNOME implement the unified input
+> method had very bad impression for us.
+
+GNOME is not about being able to change loads of things since
+development of 2.0 began. You say you need the freedom to ensure the
+input method does what you want.
+
+So why not ensure the default input method does what you want?
+
+I get the impression that each time a new input method is abandoned,
+some new project is started, gets abandoned again, etc. Resulting in a
+wish for the ability to always being able to change the input method.
+
+> You guys do a good job, but the decision of easily bundle up a single
+> input method is really a bad idea, because not all people want to
+> contribute to iBus project, and they already have effort on other
+> input methods.
+
+Of course there are developers involved in other input methods. But
+not doing something because they might get offended.. this is not really
+how a decision would be taken. Focus is on what gives a nice experience.
+
+
+-- 
+Regards,
+Olav
+