Subject: Re: XFree86 4.0.2 released
To: None <dawes@XFree86.Org>
From: T.SHIOZAKI <email@example.com>
Date: 12/20/2000 17:50:26
From: David Dawes <dawes@XFree86.Org>
Subject: XFree86 4.0.2 released
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 16:51:20 -0500
> XFree86 4.0.2 is now available.
You know that we are discussing about an important thing, that is to say,
whether 4.0.2 should include Xutf8*, don't you?
Please stop distributing it immediately.
Hiura-san, if XFree86 project neither stop distributing 4.0.2
nor revoke Xutf8* from the CVS repository, we should plan a new
X distribution project for UNIXen, which has the client set based
on SMI's I18N stuffs, which has the server set derived from XFree86 DDX
(and also incooperates non-IA32 DDX platforms), and which is more harmonious
with some UNIX vendors, X.Org and Li18nux (and of course *BSD), shouldn't we?
Aside from Xutf8* being really wrong or not, I feel distrustful about
the determining process whether 4.0.2 includes Xutf8*.
I wouldn't put it past them to enforce even the locale-elimination
advocated by Markus. I'm really afraid of it.
So, we would have no choice but to make a drastic cut in the near future,
if we should accept Xutf8* now.
Xutf8* lacks the user/market points of view in CJK, although this is
the gadget for (only a part of) developers to realize (mock) I18N/M17N.
The lack is a clear fact as far as I've heard their adovocacies,
aside from their technical misunderstanding about I18N/M17N/locale.
From the market point of view and my experience in X-TT project,
I think the way of transition to Unicode such as SMI's Xlib
("soft landing approach") will be more widely acclaimed from
ideographic community (at least Japan).
Hiura-san, in the "worst case" I say above, I'll be able to help
this project and I wish to mediate between this project and *BSD.