Control: tags -1 moreinfo confirmed On 2025-06-09 23:18:27 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > X-Debbugs-Cc: [email protected] > Control: affects -1 + src:gnome-desktop > User: [email protected] > Usertags: unblock > > [ Reason ] > > New upstream bugfix release
Please go ahead and remove the moreinfo tag once the version is available in unstable. Cheers > > [ Impact ] > > Using U+2236 RATIO rather than U+003A COLON for the separator between > hours, minutes and seconds can cause mis-display in RTL locales such as > Arabic and Hebrew, which is why the GNOME HIG (human interface > guidelines) stopped recommending it. This version goes back to using > U+003A COLON for better RTL support. > > The most important upstream change (significantly improving the > performance of gnome-control-center's backgrounds page) was already > cherry-picked as a Debian patch; now it's using the unmodified upstream > code. > > [ Tests ] > > A functionally equivalent package is available in experimental and seems > to work fine on my laptop. > > There is some automated test coverage but it's rather basic. The > "reftest" coverage for time formatting was removed in this update: it > was only useful when gnome-desktop was replacing COLON with RATIO, which > it no longer does. > > [ Risks ] > > As a core GNOME component this is a key package. > > All of the changes are narrowly targeted and would be easy to revert. > I've preemptively reverted one change (swapping the default input method > for the zh_HK locale) while asking advice from the -l10n-chinese list. > > [ Checklist ] > [x] all changes are documented in the d/changelog > [x] I reviewed all changes and I approve them > [x] attach debdiff against the package in testing > - this is for the package in experimental, what I'm proposing is > an upload to unstable differing only in the changelog > > [ Other info ] > > If the -l10n-chinese team indicates that we should be following > upstream's switch from ibus-table-cangjie5 to ibus-cangjie, that will > most likely be a separate unblock request (dropping the patch that > reverts it). -- Sebastian Ramacher
