On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 22:10, Sayamindu Dasgupta sayami...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Lucian Branescu
lucian.brane...@gmail.com wrote:
There already is a mostly complete pywebkitgtk activity, Surf.
There has been a lot of debate on whether webkit is better than gecko
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Bobby Powers bobbypow...@gmail.com wrote:
I wrote surf a while ago, and it was quite an easy port. In fact, the
demo browser for pywebkitgtk was (at least at one point) based on
browse. I did most of the work in a day and a half, but ran into
problems with
I plan to use current hulahop/pywebkitgtk to start out since there's
less to figure out. Since it's an abstraction layer, the backends can
be switched later.
I need a lot of feedback on what the abstraction layer itself needs to
do. Afaik, only Browse and Read use browser engines so far. And then
On Mon, 2010-04-26 at 17:38 -0700, Bobby Powers wrote:
I wrote surf a while ago, and it was quite an easy port. In fact, the
demo browser for pywebkitgtk was (at least at one point) based on
browse. I did most of the work in a day and a half, but ran into
problems with both webkit's
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 8:56 AM, C. Scott Ananian csc...@laptop.org wrote:
There are also gir bindings for webkit (in webkit's trunk), so it
might be worth investigating their completeness, especially since
pywebkitgtk seems to be unmaintained, as Sayamindu pointed out.
I believe we use the
There already is a mostly complete pywebkitgtk activity, Surf.
There has been a lot of debate on whether webkit is better than gecko
for our purposes. I also plan to only support what is reasonably easy
to support and let the abstraction layer be leaky.
This way, the new Browse can much more
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Lucian Branescu
lucian.brane...@gmail.com wrote:
There already is a mostly complete pywebkitgtk activity, Surf.
There has been a lot of debate on whether webkit is better than gecko
for our purposes. I also plan to only support what is reasonably easy
to
This is part of why I think having an abstraction layer is more
important than having a complete pywebkitgtk browser activity.
It would be even cooler if Read could also use this abstraction layer for epub.
On 26 April 2010 21:10, Sayamindu Dasgupta sayami...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 26,
This is part of why I think having an abstraction layer is more
important than having a complete pywebkitgtk browser activity.
I would be even cooler if Read could also use this abstraction layer for epub.
On 26 April 2010 21:10, Sayamindu Dasgupta sayami...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 26,
This is part of why I think having an abstraction layer is more
important than having a complete pywebkitgtk browser activity.
I would be even cooler if Read could also use this abstraction layer for epub.
On 26 April 2010 21:10, Sayamindu Dasgupta sayami...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 26,
I wrote surf a while ago, and it was quite an easy port. In fact, the
demo browser for pywebkitgtk was (at least at one point) based on
browse. I did most of the work in a day and a half, but ran into
problems with both webkit's packaging and the feature-completeness of
pywebkitgtk (the ability
On Mon, 2010-04-26 at 23:29 +0100, Lucian Branescu wrote:
This is part of why I think having an abstraction layer is more
important than having a complete pywebkitgtk browser activity.
I would be even cooler if Read could also use this abstraction layer for epub.
Now it makes sense. As long
12 matches
Mail list logo
