Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2023 22:38:48 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: desktop@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 269996] accessibility/at-spi2-core: make dependency on dbus optional Message-ID: <bug-269996-39348-DAFSTeEv4S@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-269996-39348@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-269996-39348@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D269996 Corey Halpin <chalpin@cs.wisc.edu> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |chalpin@cs.wisc.edu --- Comment #6 from Corey Halpin <chalpin@cs.wisc.edu> --- Upstream has made clear that they do not intend to provide ATK separate from dbus. However, the patch that Dmitry has provided here demonstrates pretty conclusively that they *can* be separated. It further demonstrates that the= re are downstream users who *want* this separation, who are willing to do the = work to implement it, and who are interested in sharing the result of that work = with other users. The question about maintenance cost seems misplaced since there are already users who are opting to pay that cost on an ongoing basis. If Dmitry's patc= h is not included in the ports tree officially, I will still be applying it or something very much like it locally. I will still be doing the work to keep= it working with new versions. I'm hardly unique in this regard. So, given that this work will already be happening, is the FreeBSD ports tr= ee the appropriate place for users to share it? (And if not, what *is* the appropriate venue?) --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-269996-39348-DAFSTeEv4S>