This is the mail archive of the libc-help@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 13 Mar 2015 10:02, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > On 03/13/2015 02:03 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > thanks, they look largely straight forward. unfortunately, i think most likely > > we're going to pass on them. it's nothing personal ... we most likely won't > > accept any more gconv modules unless it's computing related (as vague as that > > sounds) and makes a strong case as being relevant. a quick scan of our current > > modules shows they're all focused on encodings that were used historically > > (IBM/DOS/Windows/etc...) or active today (UTF8/etc...). encodings used in > > broadcast tv don't really fall into these buckets. > > > > my limited understanding of gconv is that the API isn't formalized either for > > external users. since this area of glibc has settled down now, it might be > > nice to clean it up a bit and actually formalize it. that'd allow people such > > as yourself to build and distribute gconv modules independently so others could > > at least benefit. of course, we'd need someone to champion that work :). > > > > i might mention the add-on route, but realistically no one builds glibc > > themselves anymore (they get it from their distro), so that wouldn't help. > > > > the only other thought that comes to mind would be a "contrib" sort of thing, > > but i don't think the project wants that either. if it's source included in the > > repo, then people are going to expect us to maintain it :(. > > > > i'm sorry i don't have better news. > > Given the lack of interest in adding more encodings I think > making the gconv API stable would be a lot of work with little > benefit. > > Given also that this is first new encoding in what seems like > 10 years, I'm inclined to simply accept the patch given that > it's a standardized encoding. > > Mike, Do we really see this encoding being a maintenance problem? i have no problem accepting it (pending a fuller review), i just assumed no one else would care ;) -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |