Difference between revisions of "Talk:DevTools:ICU"
From CrossWire Bible Society
David Haslam (talk | contribs) (Unused locales?) |
(→Why not work upstream?: new section) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
How does CrossWire keep track of which locales to remove from ICU to build icu-sword? As we continue to widen the number of supported locales in various front-end applications, especially Xiphos, is there a risk that the build process for icu-sword will fail to keep track of what is required? [[User:David Haslam|David Haslam]] 10:15, 20 February 2010 (UTC) | How does CrossWire keep track of which locales to remove from ICU to build icu-sword? As we continue to widen the number of supported locales in various front-end applications, especially Xiphos, is there a risk that the build process for icu-sword will fail to keep track of what is required? [[User:David Haslam|David Haslam]] 10:15, 20 February 2010 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Why not work upstream? == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Can I ask why icu-sword is being maintained as a fork instead of pushing the additional features upstream? I am working on packaging several tools (including Xiphos and Lyricue) for another distro. We have icu already and it seems like adding an icu-sword package will only create conflicts. | ||
Revision as of 10:29, 21 May 2010
Unused locales?
How does CrossWire keep track of which locales to remove from ICU to build icu-sword? As we continue to widen the number of supported locales in various front-end applications, especially Xiphos, is there a risk that the build process for icu-sword will fail to keep track of what is required? David Haslam 10:15, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Why not work upstream?
Can I ask why icu-sword is being maintained as a fork instead of pushing the additional features upstream? I am working on packaging several tools (including Xiphos and Lyricue) for another distro. We have icu already and it seems like adding an icu-sword package will only create conflicts.
