On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 2:27 AM, Jaap A. Haitsma <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 03:18, Sandy Armstrong > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Hubert Figuiere <[email protected]> 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 >
Yes I can do this (and have been planning to) and put it in a branch, but probably not for another week or so. The actual C patches are very small...the biggest part is reviewing all the use of "let" statements, and changing them...there should be no non-trivial changes though. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
