On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Marshall Greenblatt
<[email protected]>wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Darin Fisher <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> In this case, because the method will be part of the WebKit API, we'll
>> have natural reluctance to remove the method.
>> In general, however, I don't know that a comment like that is enough.  It
>> doesn't give me a way to eventually delete the method if it should become
>> unnecessary to you.  I think the only solution is for you to add a consumer
>> to the Chromium code base, and then setup a buildbot that builds
>> and preferably exercises that consumer.  Then, if someone sees the function,
>> they will be able to know who cares about it.
>>
>> Without something like that, you can be pretty much guaranteed to repeat
>> this experience in the future.
>>
>
> What kind of consumer do you have in mind?  Are you thinking improvements
> and additional test cases for test_shell, or something completely
> different?  Personally, I'd love to see the chromium embedded framework
> become part of the Chromium code base (with a full set of related test
> cases, builders, etc) but that might not be a popular option ;-).
>


I'm not sure what would be best.  I was just describing the problem.  It
might help to setup a buildbot for chromiumembedded on the fyi page:
http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/waterfall.fyi/waterfall

It looks like I can search at
http://code.google.com/p/chromiumembedded/source/checkout to see how you are
using various glue / webkit api interfaces.  I will try to do that in the
future, but I can't promise not to break you again.

-Darin

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] 
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: 
    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to