Re: Backends - was: ANNOUNCEMENT: The Future of Epiphany
- From: Robert Marcano <robert marcanoonline com>
- To: Raphael Bosshard <raphael bosshard gmail com>
- Cc: epiphany-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Backends - was: ANNOUNCEMENT: The Future of Epiphany
- Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 04:27:54 -0430
On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 08:23 +0200, Raphael Bosshard wrote:
> As an end user, I don't really care which rendering engine is used to
> display my web pages. I just want them working and I want a web
> browser that is integrated into the desktop and doesn't feel like some
> kind of external, slapped-on piece of software. Firefox and Mozilla
> always felt that way, although it has been getting much better in the
> last two years. Still; integration could be much better.
typical response of someone that only cares about their needs, In our
case as enterprise users we need Gecko for thirdparty software support
issues, but I think It is impossible to make people think in other
people needs (even when you offer help)
>
> So long,
> Raphael
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 3:57 AM, Robert Marcano
> <robert marcanoonline com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 23:39 +0100, Alp Toker wrote:
>
> > This is one point most developers are agreeing on. There's
> little value
> > in pluggable web engine backends. The abstraction layers
> tend to limit
> > functionality and increase maintenance overhead with little
> benefit to
> > the user.
>
> Yes, that is when you are using the engine you like the most,
> but not
> everyone has the same needs.
>
> I think everyone that used a crypto library saw little value
> on
> abstracting that too, but a few years later something like
> this happens:
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraCryptoConsolidation
>
> Fedora is consolidating to only one crypto library (NSS) and
> read there
> is work on patching every application, can we think in the
> future too
> (if thinking on the people that need Gecko now is not enough)
>
> >
> > There are WebKit patches for Yelp, Devhelp (removes 2000+
> lines of Gecko
> > embedding code, replaced by ~100 lines of WebKit code and
> drops the
> > requirement for a C++ compiler), some experimental WebKit
> work in
> > Evolution and most (all?) other GNOME applications which use
> web content.
>
> 2000+ lines of code that everyone writes on every app, instead
> of using
> a common API, those 100 lines of code what are doing is hiding
> the GTK
> integration code inside the WebKit GTK port. something similar
> can be
> done maintaining the abstraction layer
>
> >
> > As I understand it some of these projects are now just
> waiting for the
> > external dependency to be finalised before switching to
> WebKit by default.
> >
> > Speaking as an upstream WebKit maintainer we're happy to
> adapt the
> > project to meet the needs of GNOME developers, both in terms
> of features
> > and in project organisation, release cycle for the GTK+ port
> etc. We
> > want to see software like Epiphany and GNOME become the
> driving force
> > behind browser development rather than the other way round.
> >
> > I hope this helps clear up some of your concerns.
> >
> > Cheers!
>
> ________________________________________
> Robert Marcano
>
> web: http://www.marcanoonline.com/
> gpg --keyserver hkp://pgp.mit.edu/ --recv-key 72A0DCFD
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> epiphany-list mailing list
> epiphany-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/epiphany-list
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> epiphany-list mailing list
> epiphany-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/epiphany-list
________________________________________
Robert Marcano
web: http://www.marcanoonline.com/
gpg --keyserver hkp://pgp.mit.edu/ --recv-key 72A0DCFD
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]