Hello everyone, I am one of IBus owners. Please allow me to feed some
information for IBus.
* http://goo.gl/9LlX5 , here is a doc which gives some background of ibus
project.
* IBus is bus central multiprocess architecture, benefits are:
** Engines are separated by system process.
**
Another Input Methods introduction slides -- http://goo.gl/ag7gX
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Peng Huang shawn.p.hu...@gmail.comwrote:
Hello everyone, I am one of IBus owners. Please allow me to feed some
information for IBus.
* http://goo.gl/9LlX5 , here is a doc which gives some
Hi,
Thanks for your info! But we are just trying to stop the discussion
about which IMF is better, because it's not the right time for GNOME
to choose one.
Even though I personally vote for Fcitx _if we must choose_, I agree
that IBus is a nice piece of software, and its developers (especially
I am glade to hear you also think ibus is a good choice right now. And we
were discussing and working on IM integration with gnome community from
2010. We really want to get some progress instead of waiting forever.
And I also think it is a good to integrate gnome desktop with an IMF as
soon as
Hi,
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:43 AM, Peng Huang shawn.p.hu...@gmail.com wrote:
I am glade to hear you also think ibus is a good choice right now. And we
were discussing and working on IM integration with gnome community from
2010. We really want to get some progress instead of waiting
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Weng Xuetian wen...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't like your argue even your are arguing for fcitx actually.
No matter for IBus, fcitx, gcin, or hime, or scim which is
unmaintained now, or maliit which is developed target for on-screen
keyboard, they are want to
thanks for your mail. I just wanna let developer to know what are the C
talking about.
And sorry for using a trialling example, plz focus on how can develop a
good IM framework.
I'll follow this mail list until the topic end
Regards
XU Pengfei
在 2012年5月16日星期三，Olav Vitters 写道：
On Tue, May 15,
Hi, all.
Let me summarize the concerns of Chinese community:
GNOME is integrating ibus. This may prohibit the possibility of using
other IM frameworks/servers. Worse, this may lead to an unusable
release of GNOME.
And ibus sucks. Because:
1. Some engines are written in Python therefore slow by
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Ma Xiaojun damage3...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, all.
Let me summarize the concerns of Chinese community:
GNOME is integrating ibus. This may prohibit the possibility of using
other IM frameworks/servers. Worse, this may lead to an unusable
release of GNOME.
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 01:19:09AM +0800, Justin Wong wrote:
GNOME provide machanism, IMFs provide implementation.
I know it will not be a easy job, but it's something that should be done.
Whichever IMF u now choose as the only IMF for gnome, u are KILLING othe
IMFs, so do u think other
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 01:19:09AM +0800, Justin Wong wrote:
GNOME provide machanism, IMFs provide implementation.
I know it will not be a easy job, but it's something that should be done.
Whichever IMF u now choose as the
BTW, regarding to the input method on gnome-shell, we need to fix the following
bugs.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=658420
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=658325
Probably this is a good opportunity to inform who is interested.
I'll be back on those bugs before 3.6.
Hi Owen,
I heartily agree with this a statement of direction to pursue;
standardization is a good principle.
But there is the matter of the timetable for rolling this out --
considering the feedback from CJK users, I think assessment is needed of
what work should be done on the chosen framework
On 05/15/2012 10:17 PM, Rovanion Luckey wrote:
Greetings all,
This fall I and three other students did an accessibility study in
which Dasher was a part. One of the issues we encountered was that the
user after having typed it's sentence or any other text into Dasher
had to copy and paste it
On 14/05/2012 22:52, Germán Póo-Caamaño wrote:
On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 12:21 +0800, Weng Xuetian wrote:
I don't want people to draw the conclusion that because I'm saying
that
input methods should have simple configuration without a lot of
options,
I think that they aren't important. I'm very
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Tommy He tommy...@linux.com wrote:
I'm just start catching the whole story and find where the discussion is now.
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Weng Xuetian wen...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Germán Póo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Weng Xuetian wen...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Tommy He tommy...@linux.com wrote:
I'm just start catching the whole story and find where the discussion is now.
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Weng Xuetian wen...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue,
Hi, all.
This thread is not that long, so I've read it all. I'm yet another
native Chinese user.
I agree with the idea of Taylor's origin post.
Some people want framework of frameworks. I appreciate their efforts.
However, I don't think this make sense if we consider long-term.
If someone is
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Owen Taylor otay...@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,
I've heard enough of this and feel great disrespect.
Please Marguerite, let's not get personal (or even national) on this
thread. You should know better than occusing people who sincerelly
want GNOME to provide the best - and do not mean any nationalism or
disrespect.
But really there is another
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Marguerite Su i...@marguerite.su wrote:
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
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 otay...@redhat.com wrote:
In general, choice of input method framework is not a goal in itself.
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Vincent Untz vu...@gnome.org wrote:
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
XOXO, Vuntz,
at first I want to declare a big progress Weng and Takao made in the
other thread.
IBUS won't be compulsory. it will be optional. distribution can customize it.
it's enough for me.
actually I started my thread because I thought IBus will be compulsory
for my openSUSE distro who is
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Marguerite Su i...@marguerite.su wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Owen Taylor otay...@redhat.com wrote:
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
独裁无胆，民主无量，打着为民着想的旗号强奸民意，一句资源有限就可以免于全部责任
去吧，发展葛弄姆特色的自由软件
Go on your work, hurt more fans and lose more users
sent from android
On May 15, 2012 7:28 AM, Owen Taylor otay...@redhat.com wrote:
In general, choice of input method framework is not a goal in itself.
If we choose a single input
hi, guys
I saw this bad news from
http://linuxtoy.org/archives/gnome-and-cjk-community-debates-about-ibus-integration-of-gnome-3-6.html
It's a chinese linux news blog, Do you know how to input those characters?
I think the input is the most important things of a desktop.
If i can't input,no
Imagine, just imagine one day a desktop environment named the Kernel
Desktop Environment (KDE), would be integrated to linux kernel for better
user experience. U guys argue for kernel should not integrate a DE, then
Linus Torvalds come out and say:
On May 15, 2012 7:28 AM, Owen Taylor
I want to add more background on ibus as I watched Huang Peng developed
it from scratch back to few years ago in Beijing.
One of the main ideas behind ibus was to implement The Specification of
the IM engine Service Provider Interface which was jointly developed by
CJK(China, Japan, Korea) IM
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Justin Wong justin.w...@gmail.com wrote:
Imagine, just imagine one day a desktop environment named the Kernel Desktop
Environment (KDE), would be integrated to linux kernel for better user
experience. U guys argue for kernel should not integrate a DE, then
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 10:40:03AM +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
Q: What are GNOME people doing?
A: 1.Super-excellent ideas and design;
2.Poor implementation;
3.Working hard on fix-ups and finally it works;
4.Immediately starting to re-invent wheels from Point 1.
Cool that you have that idea, but
De: Justin Wong justin.w...@gmail.com
CC: desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
Enviado: Martes 15 de Mayo de 2012 18:05
Asunto: Re: Some points about IM integration
Imagine, just imagine one day a desktop environment named the Kernel Desktop
Environment (KDE), would be integrated to linux kernel
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:05:40AM +0800, Justin Wong wrote:
If we choose KDE as defualt and unchangable DE of linux, it doesn't make
linux like proprietary software from micro$oft, because linux will still be
100% free software, and will still be developed in the open by the linux
community.
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:04:06PM +0800, Xu Pengfei wrote:
hi, guys
I saw this bad news from
http://linuxtoy.org/archives/gnome-and-cjk-community-debates-about-ibus-integration-of-gnome-3-6.html
It's a chinese linux news blog, Do you know how to input those characters?
I think the input
...@yahoo.es wrote:
De: Justin Wong justin.w...@gmail.com
CC: desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
Enviado: Martes 15 de Mayo de 2012 18:05
Asunto: Re: Some points about IM integration
Imagine, just imagine one day a desktop environment named the Kernel
Desktop Environment (KDE), would be integrated
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:05 AM, Justin Wong justin.w...@gmail.com wrote:
All what I want to say is gnome should NOT use one single IMF, just like
linux should NOT use only one DE !
False Analogy.
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 09:43:41PM +0800, Justin Wong wrote:
独裁无胆，民主无量，打着为民着想的旗号强奸民意，一句资源有限就可以免于全部责任
去吧，发展葛弄姆特色的自由软件
Go on your work, hurt more fans and lose more users
Trolling is not acceptable. Disagree all you want but be specific. Else
I'll ban you.
--
Regards,
Olav (moderator)
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 01:05:46AM +0800, Justin Wong wrote:
There IS a solution to integrate multiple IMFs! And u just ignore ignore
and ignore this solution because of your laziness!
Your tone is not acceptable. Consider yourself banned.
--
Regards,
Olav
On Wed, 16 May 2012 00:05:40 +0800
Justin Wong justin.w...@gmail.com wrote:
Imagine, just imagine one day a desktop environment named the Kernel
Desktop Environment (KDE), would be integrated to linux kernel for better
user experience.
We've got one .. it's called the console. It has an
On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 17:55 +0800, Ma Xiaojun wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Vincent Untz vu...@gnome.org wrote:
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
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:54 AM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 10:40:03AM +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
Q: What are GNOME people doing?
A: 1.Super-excellent ideas and design;
2.Poor implementation;
3.Working hard on fix-ups and finally it works;
4.Immediately starting
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.
As I have said for several times, provide a interface that IMFs can be well
integrated with GNOME.
There is a solution too satisfy
Is there any reason that picking one input method framework is bad, if
we do it right? If the experience sucks and users have to switch to
another input method framework, yes, we've done it wrong, as Owen says
in the original email. But if it works pretty much out of the box for
all cases, what's
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:39 AM, Aron Xu aro...@gnome.org wrote:
1.GNOME is trying to have IMF integration - cool stuff.
2.But it is warned by specialized people that the plan is broken - can
lead to poor implementation and breakage.
3.People insist on having it right now for 3.6 - then must
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
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:41 AM, Justin Wong bigea...@xdlinux.info wrote:
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 code!
Should be Weng Xuetian :)
___
On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 01:39 +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:54 AM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 10:40:03AM +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
Q: What are GNOME people doing?
A: 1.Super-excellent ideas and design;
2.Poor implementation;
3.Working hard
On May 16, 2012 2:08 AM, Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote:
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.
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 2:19 AM, Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote:
On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 01:39 +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:54 AM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 10:40:03AM +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
Q: What are GNOME people doing?
A:
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 2:19 AM, Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote:
On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 01:39 +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:54 AM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 10:40:03AM +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
Q: What are GNOME people doing?
A:
Hi, all.
I've started the documentation process of CJK Input.
https://live.gnome.org/InputCJK
It just contains trivial information currently. But I will add content
from time to time.
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 3:20 AM, Ma Xiaojun damage3...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, all.
I've started the documentation process of CJK Input.
https://live.gnome.org/InputCJK
It just contains trivial information currently. But I will add content
from time to time.
Looks great, thanks for bringing
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Ma Xiaojun damage3...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, all.
I've started the documentation process of CJK Input.
https://live.gnome.org/InputCJK
Thanks, this looks like a good start!
It just contains trivial information currently. But I will add content
from time to
Greetings all,
This fall I and three other students did an accessibility study in which
Dasher was a part. One of the issues we encountered was that the user after
having typed it's sentence or any other text into Dasher had to copy and
paste it into the application they were actually using. And
民主无量，独裁无胆
一句 资源有限 就试图为自己托则，简直就是共产党
Go on your work, ignore and lose more users!
sent from android
On May 15, 2012 7:28 AM, Owen Taylor otay...@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
Sorry for being mad, no offence to u.
As I have said for sevral times, provide a interface that IMFs can be well
integrated with GNOME
but our points' are just ignored , even though Wen Xuetian has said he can
prove it with code! ( even code cannot convince u, i am disappointed)
GNOME provide
Sorry for being mad, no offence to u.
As I have said for sevral times, provide a interface that IMFs can be well
integrated with GNOME, but our points' are just
Ignored by u, even though Wen Xuetian has said he can prove it with code!
GNOME provide machanism, IMFs provide implementation.
I know
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.
As I have said for several times, provide a interface that IMFs can be well
integrated with GNOME.
There is a solution too satisfy
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:53 AM, Jasper St. Pierre
jstpie...@mecheye.net wrote:
Is there any reason that picking one input method framework is bad, if
we do it right? If the experience sucks and users have to switch to
another input method framework, yes, we've done it wrong, as Owen says
in
(05/15/12 19:13), Marguerite Su-san wrote:
I at first thought GNOME is planning to grab free options from users
and distros.
like we openSUSE choose fcitx as default IM, but we can do nothing on
IBUS then. then we won't choose fcitx any more. because we don't like
to act fool. the we have no
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
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Owen Taylor otay...@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,
Hi Owen,
I'm sorry to see that you are trying to drag us back to discuss about
which IMF is better, which is very likely to start a flame war on
the list.
Please excuse me if some of my replies are _tooo_ direct and
_seems_ to be unfriendly, the idea behind is that I *sincerely* wish
to lead
On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 10:12 +0800, Weng Xuetian wrote:
All of the above is an argument only for picking a single input method
framework. It doesn't say anything about what input method framework we
should pick. The fact that the IBus developers have been engaged with
GNOME for quite some
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 11:39 PM, Owen Taylor otay...@redhat.com wrote:
But if we have so many options that the defaults don't get
well tested, or if options conflict and produce bugs, then we're not
shipping a good ';';'''
'
I'm hoping this is a clever joke involving buggy input methods
On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 23:39 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
I don't want people to draw the conclusion that because I'm saying that
input methods should have simple configuration without a lot of options,
I think that they aren't important. I'm very aware that every single
user that comes to GNOME
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Owen Taylor otay...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 10:12 +0800, Weng Xuetian wrote:
All of the above is an argument only for picking a single input method
framework. It doesn't say anything about what input method framework we
should pick. The
On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 12:21 +0800, Weng Xuetian wrote:
I don't want people to draw the conclusion that because I'm saying
that
input methods should have simple configuration without a lot of
options,
I think that they aren't important. I'm very aware that every single
user that comes to
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Owen Taylor otay...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 23:39 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
I don't want people to draw the conclusion that because I'm saying that
input methods should have simple configuration without a lot of options,
I think that they
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Germán Póo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org wrote:
Is it possible you can enumerate all those special needs and why are
compulsory?
Just stating the options are important does not help to understand why,
neither gives the opportunity to think or determine which
I'm just start catching the whole story and find where the discussion is now.
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Weng Xuetian wen...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Germán Póo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org wrote:
Is it possible you can enumerate all those special needs and why are
71 matches
Mail list logo
