On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 03:18, Sandy Armstrong <sanfordarmstr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Hubert Figuiere <h...@figuiere.net> wrote: >> On 05/12/2009 08:01 PM, Robert Carr wrote: >>> >>> For 2.28, it may make sense to have both gjs and Seed as modules, and >>> try and keep code somewhat compatible. >>> >>> It's still not entirely clear which JavaScript engine is going to end >>> up being better long term, so we might not want to completely commit >>> to one yet. >> >> >> With that plan, it is -1 from me. 2 engines is one too many IMHO. > > We'll have two engines if Epiphany moves to webkit and gnome-shell > sticks with gjs. > > If the only user of gjs in GNOME is gnome-shell, and the gnome-shell > developers are happy with a move to Seed (have we heard from them on > this yet?), then I am +1 for Seed's inclusion and gjs' exclusion. > > I agree with Hubert that sending mixed messages about browser/js > engines is not a good idea. > I agree +1 for seed.
Robert, Can you commit to put in the few days work to make a patch for gnome-shell to use libseed? I think that makes it easy for the gnome-shell developers to go to libseed Jaap _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list