Re: Debian-JP discussions; lets wrap this up
Thank you for very useful summary.
I think I agree your opinion as an idealistic thought.
Of course, I agree almost of all, but I have some questions.
If you have a time, plaease let me know your opinion.
From: Wichert Akkerman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Debian-JP discussions; lets wrap this up
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 14:54:37 +0200
W. A.> Needless to say I disagree with both reasons. Maintainers not responding
W. A.> in time is a problem and unfortunately there is not much to be done
W. A.> about that, except reminding them occasionally, and trying to work
W. A.> directly with the upstream maintainer.
I think so too, This 1st Problem is very serious for us.
(e.g. For Japanese-users, True-Type supported X is very very
Important, (actually, Ishikawa-san maintained X-TT supported in
Debian-JP). I know that Ishikawa-san submited BTS @org to merge X-TT,
but the package maintainer does not merge it at the presense.)
For Japanese this feature (enable multi-byte) is the top of the stack,
I think. But non-multibyte users does not feel so.
# Of course, X-TT does not related multi-byte enable directly. But
# the kind of the fine but not TrueType Japanese font is very few.
Please consider I18N (or multi-byte users) and please fix the bug report as
soon as possible. > All Maintainer.
W. A.> Only if for some reason merging is not an option, only then proceed
W. A.> with posting an intent-to-package and creating a new package.
What are the cases for "some reason merging is not an option"?
Please enumerate them concreatly.
W. A.> This will indeed slow things down a bit, but I feel that the final
W. A.> result will be a much more integrated system and a lot less tension.
That way slow certainly.
Can we upload *-ja package as temporary?
(If the upstream version handle I18N correctly, the package go
Do You refuse this idea?
Research Institute of Electrical Communication
Dr. Ryuichi Arafune