* Kovid Goyal <ko...@kovidgoyal.net> [2016-01-25 14:25:01 +0530]: > Realistically speaking, the job of replacing WebKit with WebEngine > everywhere it is used is impossible. It would take man years of effort > with no reward -- other than causing regressions for end users and bug > reports for maintainers. WebEngine is only a direct replacement for > WebKit in the most superficial of use cases. > > As for the use of WebKit in calibre, in the short-to-medium term it will > remain as is, and I will probably have to end up maintaining Qt WebKit > for myself. I will make this work public, as I did for the Visual Studio > 2015 compatible fork of python that I maintain. So other users of Qt > WebKit can benefit from it and hopefully help with maintaining it.
There's also an effort going on to update QtWebKit to a newer upstream WebKit code base here: https://github.com/annulen/webkit/wiki https://github.com/annulen/webkit/commits/qtwebkit-1 https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-qt/2016-January/004037.html This sounds quite promising to me so far - maybe it'd make more sense to contribute to that (and for Linux distributions, maybe to package that in the future)? > In the longer term I plan to gradually phase out use of Qt WebKit in > calibre. However, this is likely to be a very long drawn out affair. > Some things can be replaced by WebEngine *relatively* painlessly, such > as the use of WebKit in the viewer and editor. Others, such as the use > of WebKit for a headless, JS enabled automated browser in the calibre > recipe system and for the rendering of HTML to PDF will be much harder, > requiring the aforementioned man-years of effort. I think PhantomJS came to the same conclusion and started contributing to the above QtWebKit repo.  http://phantomjs.org/ Florian -- http://www.the-compiler.org | m...@the-compiler.org (Mail/XMPP) GPG: 916E B0C8 FD55 A072 | http://the-compiler.org/pubkey.asc I love long mails! | http://email.is-not-s.ms/
Description: Digital signature