Le 10/02/2015 18:14, Aron Xu a écrit :
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 11:27 PM, Didier Roche <email address hidden>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> -> fcitx:
>> * NEEDS FIXING: I guess the autostart binary (in fcitx-bin) shouldn't be
>> in usr/bin, but more in an exec path like libexec for instance. You told
>> upstream liked the idea, any news since september for a release with
>> this? I would prefer that we don't pulling the user PATH with autostart
>> content.
>>
>>
> Upstream changed their mind because they think it's a tool that can be used
> to detect whether fcitx is running already, and they don't think renaming
> it useful. Can we keep it there?
Fair enough :)
All good an approved, thanks a lot for the modifications! So now, get something in main depending on fcitx and other packages (like seeding, or a recommends/deps) and we'll promote to main the needed binaries.
Le 10/02/2015 18:14, Aron Xu a écrit :
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 11:27 PM, Didier Roche <email address hidden>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> -> fcitx:
>> * NEEDS FIXING: I guess the autostart binary (in fcitx-bin) shouldn't be
>> in usr/bin, but more in an exec path like libexec for instance. You told
>> upstream liked the idea, any news since september for a release with
>> this? I would prefer that we don't pulling the user PATH with autostart
>> content.
>>
>>
> Upstream changed their mind because they think it's a tool that can be used
> to detect whether fcitx is running already, and they don't think renaming
> it useful. Can we keep it there?
Fair enough :)
All good an approved, thanks a lot for the modifications! So now, get something in main depending on fcitx and other packages (like seeding, or a recommends/deps) and we'll promote to main the needed binaries.