On Nov 11, 2012 1:57 AM, "Jeremy Bicha" <jbi...@ubuntu.com> wrote > > GNOME 3.6 (which was released in September) only supports ibus > 1.4.99+; therefore we must make the transition at the start of the > Ubuntu 13.04 development cycle. Ubuntu developers like Seb Bacher > expressed that requiring the latest ibus and gstreamer-1.0 were two > risky moves but GNOME didn't want to wait until after those packages > had made stable releases. This is the root cause for > http://pad.lv/1045914 . Also GNOME 3.6 is already partly in Debian > experimental. > > Would it help if I attached an updated patch? > > Thanks, > Jeremy >
GNOME 3.6 can live with older version of ibus if you don't enable the compile time integration, and currently the integration makes input experience gets downgraded heavily, it's highly recommended not to enable it at least for this cycle. Reasons behind are the integration hides most input method engines in ibus that GNOME developers think useless, they believe that only a small number of high quality engines will be able to handle all the users' needs, while most of them have never tried a input method, not mentioning how users depend on the existence of many many different engines that they never heard about. Another reason is when you have the integration enabled and ibus-daemon available, any other input method framework will not work because gnome-settings-daemon will continusly reset the input method related variables and try to start ibus. In this case nether the alternative input method framework nor ibus can behave normally. Although I don't recommend to use a pre-release version, patches are welcomed to help us make everything better. On Nov 11, 2012 1:57 AM, "Jeremy Bicha" <jbi...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > On 10 November 2012 11:57, Osamu Aoki <os...@debian.org> wrote: > > Movimg old symbols of different SONAME here may not be right solution. > > (I am new to this symbols thing so please tell me if I am wrong.) > > > > I thought debian/libibus-1.0-5.symbols should be more like attached. > > (I think to fix http://bugs.debian.org/690287 , the first line of this > > file will become libibus-1.0-5 instead of libibus-1.0-0. Then the rest > > of the lines will be bumped, too.) > > > > No package compiled to use SONAME libibus-1.0.so.5 had version like > > 1.2.99.20100202 nor 1.4.1. So having such low version seems strange to > > me. > > No, the point of the .symbols file is that packages that only use > symbols introduced in an older version like 1.2.99 won't need to > depend on the latest ibus (1.4.99). If you bump the version of all the > symbols then you don't really get any benefits from having .symbols. > You can read man dpkg-gensymbols for more information. > > > PS: I think packaging these 1.4.99 version for Debian next release is > > fine since RH will release next stable 1.5 version before Debian next > > release. But I wonder if it is good idea or not for Ubuntu since you > > are looking for shorter time before release. The pre-release ibus > > family packages from FEDORA are not as complete and stable as 1.4 > > series. Some configuration items are missing etc. This was the source > > of my reluctance to package these at this moment. I thought we should > > be selective about what we package and is better for Ubuntu. > > GNOME 3.6 (which was released in September) only supports ibus > 1.4.99+; therefore we must make the transition at the start of the > Ubuntu 13.04 development cycle. Ubuntu developers like Seb Bacher > expressed that requiring the latest ibus and gstreamer-1.0 were two > risky moves but GNOME didn't want to wait until after those packages > had made stable releases. This is the root cause for > http://pad.lv/1045914 . Also GNOME 3.6 is already partly in Debian > experimental. > > Would it help if I attached an updated patch? > > Thanks, > Jeremy > > _______________________________________________ > Pkg-ime-devel mailing list > pkg-ime-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ime-devel >
