Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-23 Thread Tomohiro KUBOTA
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-23 Thread Denis Barbier
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-23 Thread Tomohiro KUBOTA
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-22 Thread Branden Robinson
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-22 Thread Tomohiro KUBOTA
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.

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-22 Thread Tomohiro KUBOTA
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-22 Thread Branden Robinson
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 09:02:02AM +0900, Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote: > Some supplementations: Then I'll respond to this message and let it serve as a reply to both. First of all, thanks for clarifying your opinions and perspective. > From: Tomohiro KUBOTA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Bug#215647: [

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-21 Thread Tomohiro KUBOTA
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 the main software (x

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-21 Thread Tomohiro KUBOTA
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-21 Thread Branden Robinson
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-21 Thread Branden Robinson
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 >

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-21 Thread Branden Robinson
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-21 Thread Christian Perrier
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-20 Thread Denis Barbier
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-20 Thread Tomohiro KUBOTA
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 had > already submi

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-18 Thread Daniel Stone
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-18 Thread Branden Robinson
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-18 Thread Branden Robinson
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-17 Thread Tomohiro KUBOTA
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-17 Thread Denis Barbier
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

Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n

2003-10-17 Thread Branden Robinson
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