DD If you personally choose not to meet their needs (which is
DD entirely up to you, and entirely reasonable), someone else might.
David,
What exactly are you arguing with ?
I'm saying that this code deserves being read, that nobody has
appeared to do so until now (or if they did, they didn't
On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 04:33:47PM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
DD If you personally choose not to meet their needs (which is
DD entirely up to you, and entirely reasonable), someone else might.
David,
What exactly are you arguing with ?
The notion you expressed that adding features to the
What exactly are you arguing with ?
DD The notion you expressed that adding features to the freetype backend
DD goes against a goal of encouraging application developers to move to
DD client side fonts,
I never said such a thing. I said that adding features to the
freetype backend goes against
From: Chisato Yamauchi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Fonts] libfreetype-xtt2 bench
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 02:05:58 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Would you accept our libfreetype-xtt2 patch? If our patch
is accepted before XFree86-4.4 release, I think that you will
be able
CY As you said, I've worked for merging X-TT functionalities
CY and various fixes. And I've released libfreetype-xtt2 patch
CY version 1.0b.
CY Would you accept our libfreetype-xtt2 patch? If our patch
CY is accepted before XFree86-4.4 release, I think that you will
CY be able to remove
The main point is that I consider core fonts to be obsolete -- client
applications, especially internationalised ones, should move to Xft.
DD That's an issue to take up with application developers.
Isn't that what we are doing?
Let me reformulate this: I do not think that adding
On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 11:29:30PM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
The main point is that I consider core fonts to be obsolete -- client
applications, especially internationalised ones, should move to Xft.
DD That's an issue to take up with application developers.
Isn't that what we are
