Re: im-config | Use im-config on Wayland without uninstalling IBus (!5)
2020년 7월 13일 (월) 오전 10:39, Gunnar Hjalmarsson <gunnarhj@ubuntu.com>님이 작성:
>
> On 2020-07-12 05:42, Changwoo Ryu wrote:
> > Let's not repeat that again.
>
> I summarized and clarified my arguments in response to Osamu's question.
>
> > "The UI" is actually the Ubuntu settings UI which is only in Ubuntu
> > and not in Debian.
>
> It's both of course. Even if the confusion your proposal may lead to is
> of greater importance in Ubuntu for a couple of reasons, my arguments
> apply to Debian as well.
>
> > We are not working on im-config for compatibility with a derived
> > distro's settings UI.
>
> I thought Debian and Ubuntu cooperated. Maybe a misconception on my part.
In general, I'm OK with Ubuntu specific changes in Debian packages as
long as they don't break anything. But your Wayland change breaks how
im-config has worked (even though you don't agree) and I think fixing
it is more important than keeping UI compatibility.
> Let me point out that im-config offers an API with the explicit purpose
> to allow im-config to be controlled from other programs. Ubuntu does
> nothing but making use of that API.
This is not true. im-config never offers an API. im-config has its own
CUI and GUI interfaces and it is not used as an API by other packages
in Debian. The Ubuntu language selection UI just executes im-config
command and reads its output. See the source code:
https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/language-selector/tree/LanguageSelector/ImConfig.py
OK I think it is a clever use of im-config. But reading command line
output can not be a stable "API". Its syntax and semantics can be
changed in any time for any reason and then the Ubuntu UI needs to be
modified to follow the change.
> > Whatever breakage the Ubuntu UI would have, it can be handled by
> > updating the Ubuntu UI or making an Ubuntu version of im-config.
>
> Let's not jump the gun.
>
> > We are talking about the Debian version of im-config and we should
> > talk in the context of Debian, not Ubuntu.
>
> Not sure what you want to say with that. Yes, this discussion is about
> the design of im-config in the Debian archive. But Ubuntu uses the thing
> as well. Are you saying that Debian development should not take into
> account how downstream is affected? If you are, it's a bit remarkable IMHO.
Breaking downstream SW is not a happy thing. But if there's no better
solution, yes, doing it is better than making the upstream do an
inconsistent behavior.
> > And there seems to be no new argument why this GNOME/Wayland
> > conditional should be in the "ibus" choice.
>
> Right. The previous arguments still stand.
>
> > And I gave enough reasons why some users do not want this GNOME
> > Wayland input default and why the choice should be kept.
>
> A choice that does not exist can't "be kept".
This repeated argument is started by mixing two related-but-different
changes in one commit. As I said earlier, it's a typical pattern of
feature removal.
If you still think that removing GTK_IM_MODULE settings does not break
anything as the Wayland setup is newly introduced, you also have to
say that there's no Ubuntu UI breakage in my proposed change as Ubuntu
in Wayland is new.
> As far as I understand, the only Korean specific issue you mentioned is
> the ibus-hangul/mutter bug which is about to be fixed. Given that, how
> is the Korean special case configuration still motivated?
There is another issue (preserving preedit style set in ibus-hangul)
but it's not important. The Korean specific workaround in my proposed
im-config change can be removed with GNOME 3.38.x release.
Reply to: