Previously Ken N. wrote: > I've read the patch(grep-2.0-mb1.04.diff.gz). Actually, the patch > just add a capablity to handle data which coded EUC-JP or Mircosoft- > Kanji code, and it does not handle even JIS-7bit code (like Junet > code, see RFC1468). I suppose that the FSF would reject the patch > because what GNU wants is more general extention, i.e. m17ned grep. What annoys me is that there seems to be this desire to rush all those patches into Debian and that is mostly done by forking packages. I understand that you would like to all those updates packages in Debian, but there seems to be a lack of communication between the people making and maintaining the i8n-patches and the maintainers of the already existing packages (and sometimes even upstream maintainers). I realize how difficult it is to write add proper i8n-code to packages, but I think more effort should be done to talk to maintainers about merging patches and working together on this. If a patch would be rejected by the FSF or anyone else simply because it doesn't support all encodings is something that is up to the upstream maintainer mostly. I think that in fact a lot of those patches will be accepted. Remember the phrase `release fast, release often'? Trying to get those patches out fast will only encourage people to use and enhance them; waiting for a perfect patch does not make much sense. Perfection doesn't exist in software, there are always improvements possible. Wichert. -- ============================================================================== This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: wichert@cs.leidenuniv.nl WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/
Attachment:
pgp2vbJrgygg3.pgp
Description: PGP signature