Bug#1029821: change gnome-desktop's default choice of Japanese input methods for Debian

[Kentaro Hayashi]

Hi,


On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 09:42:36 +0000 Simon McVittie <smcv at debian.org> wrote:
> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
> 
snip
> 
> Is there consensus among Japanese-speaking users of Debian that mozc is
> a better default for all Japanese speakers, including new users who are
> not familiar with GNOME or Debian?

At least, there is the fact that bullseye's default choice is ibus-mozc 
for Japanese users.

> I want to avoid changing this from anthy to mozc-jp, and then getting a
> second bug report from a different Japanese user saying that we need to
> change it back!
> 
> Looking at #984875 and #983653, I also see a mention of mozc only being
> available on certain architectures: it's available on x86, ARM and riscv64,
> but not on mips*el, ppc64el or s390x.
> 
> How does this interact with the default being mozc-jp? Do we need to use
> a #ifdef to make the default be mozc on architectures that have it, and
> anthy on architectures that don't?

Surely, it may be better to modify the patch to consider non-available mozc
 on certain architectures. 

> I'm also concerned that mozc still depends on GTK 2 (a switch to GTK
> 3 was tried and then reverted, see #967641). This is OK for bookworm,
> but will probably not be supportable in Debian 13.

I didn't noticed that issue. Thank you.

> On Wed, 22 Feb 2023 at 15:09:15 +0900, kenhys at xdump.org wrote:
> >   Thus with attached patch, gnome-initial-setup will not
> >   show label for mozc-jp as "日本語 (Mozc)" by default.
> 
> What would be the best label to be displayed there?
> 

IMHO, 日本語 (Mozc).

> What is actually displayed instead?
> 

As I mentioned already, "mozc-jp".

> >   To display label correctly, fetch_ibus_engines_result must be called 
> >   in advance.
> 
> That's probably not possible: fetch_ibus_engines_result is called
> asynchronously with the result of a D-Bus method call, so it's already
> called as early as possible, and before that point we don't have the
> necessary information.

Currently, I agree with you.

Regards,