[Pkg-ime-devel] Bug#643004: Bug#643004: [Patch] please improve the description

[Tomas Pospisek]

On Tue, 4 Oct 2011, Aron Xu wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 19:35, Tomas Pospisek <tpo_deb at sourcepole.ch> wrote:
>> Package: fcitx-bin
>> Version: 1:4.1.1-1
>> Severity: normal
>> Tags: patch
>>
>> The project's homepage explains the "fcitx" acronym as either
>> "Free Chinese Input Toy of X" or "Free Chinese Input Toy for X".
>>
>> I have a lot of trouble to make any sense of the former description.
>>
>> The latter description makes a bit more sense allthough I'm at a loss,
>> what "Toy" could possibly be meaning. It is an input tool right? And
>> not a toy? Is "Toy" meant to be a quirky reference to fcitx's
>> history? Or an inside joke?
>>
> Fcitx is an input tool, and to be more accurate it's a combination of
> input method framework and peripherals of it. The name is because of
> Fcitx's history. When Fcitx was created, there wasn't a detailed
> definition of the concept of "input method" or "input framework", and
> the author of Fcitx didn't intend to change this situation - he just
> wanted a simple program to help everyone input Chinese characters.
> Similarly, there is another application called "kimtoy", which is a
> working replacement of the heavily out-dated kimpanel.
>
>> The intended purpose of a debian package's description is to describe
>> very succintly a package's pupose. So "Chinese input tool for X" would
>> make sense. If you want to keep a humorous edge then I'd suggest to
>> move the humour either into the long description or maybe even rather
>> into /usr/doc/*/README or HISTORY or similar.
>
> Sorry, but I prefer to act in accordance with the maintainer's view
> and keep the short description as it.

Please note, that the fcitx page itself 
(http://www.fcitx.org/main/?q=node/10) says:

"What is fcitx?

  It stands for Free Chinese Input Toy of X, an input method for Linux"

That's allready much clearer. You could use that:

  free chinese input toy for X, an input method for Linux

>> In the same vein I'd suggest to change the long description:
>>
>>  Fcitx is a Chinese input tool for X. It was initially designed for
>>  Chinese users and used for the XIM protocol. It has evolved into
>>  a highly modularized, feature rich input method framework for
>>  Unix-like platforms supporting a considerable amount of frontends,
>>  backends and modules.
>
> Here I still prefer to keep "Fcitx is the Free Chinese Input Toy of
> X", and I would like to follow your advice to add about it's an input
> tool.
>
>>  Fcitx is an ideal choice for the vast majority of input needs (?).
>>  Many of its features provide users of Unix-like platforms with a modern
>>  input experience for the first time. It has also greatly lowered the
>>  threshold for developers, making the development of additional
>>  functionality much easier than ever before.
>
> I agree about the first sentence, there should be something after
> "vast majority", can you give me some advice about how to complete
> this sentence?

That sentence is complete. I put the question mark there because I was 
wondering whether I understood the original sentense correctly. What I was 
wondering is, when the text is speaking about the "vast majority of input 
needs", then there are assumedly "input needs" that are not covered by 
Fcitx. What "needs" would that possibly be?

Maybe that part of the phrase could be dropped and replaced by:

   Fcitx is an ideal choice for Chinese input in X.

> Fcitx is ready for all Chinese users, has the facilities for any
> Japanese/Korean users (need someone to write small wrapper programs).
> Upstream is planning to add support for m17n in near future, the
> maintainer just needs some users' feedback to make sure everything
> works.
>
>>  This package provides the essential executable binaries. If you are
>>  looking for a working input experience, please install the package
>>  "fcitx" instead.

Greets,
*t