After GNOME people decided that per windows input source (layout or input method) is useless. https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=684210 ( The feature existed in 3.4 and before)
They made something even more surprising; white listing input engines and properties input engines can expose. Source code hints: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-control-center/tree/panels/region/gnome-region-panel-input.c#n67 http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-shell/tree/js/ui/status/keyboard.js#n188 Mailing list hints: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2012-November/msg00091.html https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2012-November/msg00123.html Bug Tracker hints: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=688914 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=688916 Disclaimer: I feel strong about this issue so I was kind of rambling, sorry about that. The first one does affect us, though a patch would be easy to write. We have decent packages for every working IBus engines in our repository (except ibus-libpinyin, it may requires IBus 1.4.99, I'm not sure). We also have our own way of shipping input methods packages. Then what? GNOME force downstreams to follow them. https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=688914#c10 Even if they offered a gsettings key for show_all_sources. It is by definition non-discoverable. Worse, it will show XKB duplicates, useless m17n engines, ... That probably make the input source list unnecessarily much longer. What if someone come up with a new engine? 1. She'd ask the upstream to update the white list. GNOME guy claim that it is a one-liner change. Yes it is. But how would GNOME guys review a engine for languages that they don't understand? What if the engine author is not well verse in English? 2. She'd ask all the downstream to patch their released versions also? That must be awful, right? >From a philosophical point of view, it means that the input space of GNOME is no longer a open 'market'. Which engines can be used are no longer determined by users or distributors. It is supervised by G-C-C developer(s) and thus proprietary. The second doesn't affect us directly, fortunately, since we need to re-write a new IBus indicator for AppIndicator anyway. But the end result is annoying, on Fedora 18 (I install pre-release version), only ibus-anthy works properly. Other engines are well handicapped by losing their property menu (context menu). The philosophical annoyance is the same. It makes an open platform proprietary. proprietary: one that possesses, owns, or holds exclusive right to something -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
