"Benjamin Smedberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Vlad J. wrote: > > > Thanks for pointing out that I could use this Control. > > No, I can not use it because it is broken at its present version (I mean > > sources), it's abandoned and not updated for many versions and finally it is > > intended for Windows only, while I need a cross-platform solution (read > > XPCom-based). > > XULRunner as far as I understand is supposed to run application(s), while I > > need Gecko API exposed. There are no plans on creating plugins or extensions > > or XUL applications. We'd need Gecko available through an API, just similar > > to referenced ActiveX Control. > > This is incorrect. XULRunner is the correct solution to provide embedding > APIs. It is used from Java, for example, by the Eclipse ATF project, and it > can be embedded from binary code as well.
Thanks, but I'd avoid it because a) it's not as widely tested as FireFox or Mozilla b) it is still based on 1.8.0.4/1.5.0.4 sources (personally I have nothing against, but ask users if they want it) > > It's called Mozilla Control. What if I call my distro Embedded Mozilla > > Browser? I think with this approach there would be no collisions or > > misinterprettings or abuses. > > Can I suggest that you don't call it anything, you just ship the code and > use it? Then this whole discussion is moot. seems it's going to be that. :) -jv _______________________________________________ legal mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/legal
