[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       webkit-dev
Subject:    Re: [webkit-dev] Changes in QtWebKit development
From:       Allan Sandfeld Jensen <kde () carewolf ! com>
Date:       2013-10-01 7:50:09
Message-ID: 201310010950.10032.kde () carewolf ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Monday 30 September 2013, Oliver Hunt wrote:
> On Sep 30, 2013, at 7:41 AM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen <kde@carewolf.com> wro=
te:
> > Some of this is exactly the reason we want to keep Qt WebKit alive. It
> > may never be possible to fully replace Qt WebKit with anything
> > Blink/Chromium based.
> =

> I really don=92t understand this, there are only two options:
> 1. Qt Webkit is critical to you and you want to support and maintain it,
> and do all the work necessary for that; or 2. Qt WebKit is not critical,
> and so you could simply branch and have a permanent stable release
> platform similar to what the S60 port did years ago.
> =

> Currently you seem to be arguing for a third option, wherein all of the
> WebKit developers need to deal with your port, and be hamstrung by the
> numerous invasive Qt-isms scattered throughout the codebase, for a port
> that isn=92t considered critical to its own platform.
> =

Actually I am arguing we should get rid of most of the invasive Qt'ism unle=
ss =

they are really required for Qt WebKit to even work. Many of them were only =

necessary due to having to support so many platforms. With a more narrow fo=
cus =

we can hopefully get rid of 90% of the burden. If it turns out not to be =

possible in the end, we can always leave after having helped as far as we =

could.

Best regards
`Allan
_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]