I am glade to hear you also think ibus is a good choice right now. And we were discussing and working on IM integration with gnome community from 2010. We really want to get some progress instead of waiting forever.
And I also think it is a good to integrate gnome desktop with an IMF as soon as possible, because we can get user feedback and find some really problems early. And then we could continue improving it. And I also believe Fujiwarat's patches will not forbid using other IMFs with gnome 3. We already considered it. Even if in future, GNOME 3 decides to replace ibus with a new better IMF, it should not be difficult. And most source code could be reused. And the new IMF could learn from the IM Gnome integration as well. It could benefit both IM and Gnome communities. I don't think support multi-IMF at beginning is a good idea. It need much efforts which can not be afforded right now. I think workable way is integrating with one IMF at first, and may support multi-IMF in following iterations. I think IM communities will contribute those efforts. I hope Gnome could become more non-technical user-friendly, and Linux be successful in Desktop area as well. On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Aron Xu <aro...@gnome.org> wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for your info! But we are just trying to stop the discussion > about "which IMF is better", because it's not the right time for GNOME > to choose one. > > Even though I personally vote for Fcitx _if we must choose_, I agree > that IBus is a nice piece of software, and its developers (especially > you and fujiwara) are nice people. > > But unfortunately, now we need try to give enough information to GNOME > people so that they can know what's IMF and how it works. And only > then it's the time to start further discussion about this feature, > IMHO. >
_______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
