Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 19:36:34 -0400 From: Mikhail Teterin <mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> To: "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@nagual.pp.ru> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/x11-fonts/XFree86-4-fontCyrillic Makefile Message-ID: <200209161936.34409.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> In-Reply-To: <20020916222903.GA65582@nagual.pp.ru> References: <200209150832.g8F8W9r9062966@freefall.freebsd.org> <200209161821.34758.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> <20020916222903.GA65582@nagual.pp.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 16 September 2002 06:29 pm, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: = On Mon, Sep 16, 2002 at 18:21:34 -0400, Mikhail Teterin wrote: = > On Monday 16 September 2002 05:59 pm, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: = > = On Mon, Sep 16, 2002 at 17:42:48 -0400, Mikhail Teterin wrote: = > = > = > = > I tried and I could not find one. I asked you for the link, but you = > = = > = http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/archive/2002/freebsd-i18n/ = > = > You know quite well, this is not what I asked for. I quoted the message, = > which I believe to be the last in the thread, that discussed this matter = > on i18n. Incidentally, the opinion expressed in it supports that of mine. = = Re-read message you quote twice, especially underlined part: = = "The question is whether to install all of them per default or to = install only koi8-c and make koi8-[ru] aliases. For me it doesn't matter." = ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I already quoted that WITH THE NEXT PHRASE, which you chose to drop -- right where he talks about the optional STRICT_RFC knob. = Harti you quote is obviously on my side, from his earlier message = there: = "RFC-1489 is not marked as obsolete, so people will countinue to use = it and, honestly, I don't see a reason to remove support even if it = would be obsoleted." You are taking this (and the previous quote) out of context. = So I have Harti and Valeriy on my side, since there is no signs of = Maxim in i18n list discussion, you are alone, as I already say. Khmm, indeed, Valeriy's response -- which I missed before -- is much better articulated... I wish you had his clarity. I remain convinced, however, the idea is sound, because, unlike the example he quotes, it does not involve applications. If someone will require strict conformance, it will be as easy as installing an additional port -- something they currently have to do anyway. = > No you did not. Somehow you manage to compare two partially broken = > things and achieve the conclusion, that yours is "less" broken. Or = > broken in a "better" way. It continues to appear, that it is solely = > because it is *yours*. = Not because of mine but because more characters from standard are = implemented. Really this is combined effort of several people and I am = only co-author. = > = "the code in question" != port = > = > Please, re-read the Subject header of this e-mail -- and that of all other = > postings in this thread... = I already explain situation with port maintainer in this thread. You only say what's wrong with the actual maintainer, but you do not explain, what makes you his replacement... Your commit was unauthorized. -mi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200209161936.34409.mi%2Bmx>