On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 03:20:47PM +0800, ChangZhuo Chen (陳昌倬) wrote: > On Sat, Nov 15, 2025 at 11:37:22AM -0500, Boyuan Yang wrote: > > The migration from fcitx 4.x to fcitx 5.x should be straightforward. The previous concerns raised > > in [3] should have been fully addressed. On the other hand, migrating to ibus for all Tranditional > > Chinese desktop environments is also viable. > > > > Please consider reviewing the current available Input Method frameworks in Debian and > > make the switch at your convenience, but the decision should be made no later than the Debian Forky freeze > > (~Dec 2026). Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. > > disclosure: > I am one of the upstream maintainers of chewing, ibus-chewing, and > package maintainer of fonts-noto-cjk. I'm also a maintainer of chewing and ibus-chewing. > * For task-chinese-t-desktop, I think both ibus, or fcitx5 are good for > me. Since I use ibus-chewing, I do prefer to use ibus-chewing as > default. Agreed. Both ibus-chewing and fcitx5-chewing are actively maintained. I think users will be happy with either. > * I don't think we need so many input methods in task-chinese-t-desktop. > User normally uses only one input method for Chinese. I think we shall > keep only chewing here, and let user decides what they want to install > by themselves. No objection. Or just rec: ibus-table or fcitx5-table-extra, both either suggests or recommends other table based input method packages. > * I think we can also remove fonts-arphic-* from Suggestions since we > already have fonts-noto-cjk in Recommends. No objection. fonts-arphic-* has it's historical importance but nowadays fonts-noto-cjk is more common. Kan-Ru
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature