Hi,
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Denis Barbier)
Subject: Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 08:03:47 +0200
> Please describe a simple scenario where changing default fonts is
> helpful. I do not understand why you discussed those UTF-8 issues,
> they
On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 09:03:48AM +0900, Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote:
[...]
> On app-defaults files: why peoples speaking some languages are
> forced to modify app-default files while others don't need to do?
[...]
Please describe a simple scenario where changing default fonts is
helpful. I do not und
Hi,
From: Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 22:11:56 -0500
> You are presenting me with an ultimatum: accept your patch or else. You
> do not appear to feel there are any grounds upon which you
tag 215647 + wontfix
thanks
On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 09:30:04AM +0900, Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I reopened this bug, because:
> - I don't think the discussion finished.
> - This bug is in the to-do list in the upstream.
>
> Please don't close this bug (the upstream agrees this should be
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag 215647 + wontfix
Bug#215647: xterm: change the encoding according to the current LC_CTYPE locale
Tags were: wontfix experimental patch
Tags added: wontfix
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tra
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 215647 xterm: change the encoding according to the current LC_CTYPE locale
Bug#215647: xterm: want ISO 10646-1 fonts used by default instead of ISO 8559-1
Changed Bug title.
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reopen 215647
Bug#215647: xterm: want ISO 10646-1 fonts used by default instead of ISO 8559-1
Bug reopened, originator not changed.
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system admin
Hi,
I reopened this bug, because:
- I don't think the discussion finished.
- This bug is in the to-do list in the upstream.
Please don't close this bug (the upstream agrees this should be
improved) until my patch will be adopted or a fixed upstream
version will be available as a Debian package.
Hi,
> You need to remember what xterm is. First and foremost, it's a VT100
> terminal emulator. It got a Tektronix 4014 emulator bolted onto it at
> one point, and it added support for VT 220s (and 320s and 420s as well,
> I think), but fundamentally it's still an 8-bit terminal emulator.
>
> X
Hi,
Some supplementations:
From: Tomohiro KUBOTA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 07:58:40 +0900 (JST)
> 1. If you say "People using UTF-8 locales may have to use uxterm
>(or other special softwares) because
Hi,
From: Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 15:07:51 -0500
> People using UTF-8 locales should use uxterm.
No.
Reasons:
1. If you say "People using UTF-8 locales may have to use uxterm
(or
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 07:28:17PM +0900, Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote:
> I think this way may be useful for some people, if the aliases are
> set automatically according to the current LC_CTYPE locale.
> (There are already a standardized way (LC_CTYPE) to "choose a codeset"
> and we should not introduce
On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 07:21:19AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> The solution to this problem is probably by finding more and more
> manpower for maintaining our packages and all stuff we want to
> progress in Debian.
>
> If we lack manpower, we have to make sacrifices, which is always hard
>
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 11:28:10PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> Nope, my sole intention was to be as assholish as you were in your
> original post.
What a noble goal. In any case, I'd say you exceeded your own
expectations.
> That said, I would be glad to help and subscribe to debian-x just now
Quoting Branden Robinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> I trust you're aware of the massive rearrangement of the XKB data in
> 4.3.0, which is why I haven't been applying much in the way of XKB data
> patches. Well, no, you probably weren't. That would require reading
> the traffic on the debian-x maili
On Sat, Oct 18, 2003 at 04:02:34PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
[...]
> Let's not forget, although apparently you have, that I was one of the
> first adopters of po-debconf.
>
> Given how often your own localization patches have been submitted and
> accepted (usually pretty promptly -- the next
Hi,
From: Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 16:11:24 -0500
> There are *also* discussion and communication problems, in that I feel
> you were not sharing vital information with me, namely that you h
On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 09:36:31PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 10:52:47AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [...]
> > The bug submitter had already contacted the upstream maintainer of
> > XTerm, and the patches had been rejected by him. Apparently, the
> > submitter's goa
On Sat, Oct 18, 2003 at 05:28:44AM +0900, Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote:
> From: Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n
> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 10:52:47 -0500
>
> > It was an upstream decision which I elected to respec
On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 09:36:31PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 10:52:47AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [...]
> > The bug submitter had already contacted the upstream maintainer of
> > XTerm, and the patches had been rejected by him. Apparently, the
> > submitter's goa
Hi,
From: Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 10:52:47 -0500
> It was an upstream decision which I elected to respect.
Ok, I understand that you don't think there are any technical problem
on my pat
On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 10:52:47AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
[...]
> The bug submitter had already contacted the upstream maintainer of
> XTerm, and the patches had been rejected by him. Apparently, the
> submitter's goal was to get Debian to fork from upstream after the exact
> same change h
On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 01:14:31PM +0200, Martin Quinson wrote:
> You should have requested to tag it directly "wontfix", you would have saved
> yourself some work ;) Or was the discussion with upstream done in the
> meantime?
Yes, discussion was done with upstream in the meantime.
> I also fail
On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 11:22:06AM +0900, Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote:
> Hi,
>
> From: Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n
> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 14:44:21 -0500
>
> > Please file a bug and tag it "experimental".
>
> Ok, I did.
You should have request
24 matches
Mail list logo
