Hope this makes you feel slightly better: On Thursday 20 February 2003 09:30, Frederic Crozat wrote: > > And I'm almost sure this problem is not the same as the previous one, > since Xrender doesn't care AT ALL of encoding.. have to admit I didn't check on the previous bug. But i think freetype2 does care about encoding? It is just no Xrender bug.
>> > Then fix OpenOffice.. :) hmm..yes..I do not even *try* to understand that stuff. >> > A vote will NEVER convince me to add something which can break rendering, > so don't lose your time on that.. People can vote whatever they want, if > it means adding instability to part I maintain, I won't follow their > votes.. Just because something is pretty don't mean it should be in.. Well..that is sensible. But it also depends a lot on what exactly is changed in a new freetype2. If it is bugfixes, it is perhaps safe to do. > > Is it so hard to understand we can't just add any patches (or new > features) which have not YET been released as stable, just because it > MIGHT enhanced rendering for some people and BREAK rendering for other ?? Hmm...AFAIK these patches have been around for a while, and it was discussed here as well, a long time ago. Everybody agreed that it looked good and seemed stable IIRC. However, I cannot remember if you gave a reason for not incorporating it back then. > > I'm tired to have to justify myself EACH time !! Don't, and sorry if it came on a bad moment. However, sometimes I see that you have to make a lot of noise to attract some attention. That is certainly not true for all maintainers of main, but for some. If you do not shout hard enough you are certain to be ignored. This is a drawback of the current system. So, my guess is: more justifiying to come for you:( It comes with the job it seems, but I do not blame you for not liking it. Actually, you are being relatively spared here on cooker-ml. Ask some clubvolunteers on how they have to defend descisions (that we do not even make!!) to a lot of complaining clubmembers, who are sometimes much more unpolite that we are:) Danny
