I think questioning someone's priorities in an open source project is
generally not polite, unless there is some direct relationship between
different tasks. For example, if someone introduce a new feature
(let's say support for parts of the FooML language) and it had lots of
bugs, it might be reasonable to ask them to fix some of the bugs
before implementing more FooML features. But that doesn't seem to be
the case here.
Ultimately, I think it's up to the Gtk port maintainers and the folks
maintaining v8 bindings to decide whether they want to support and
maintain this functionality, and to review the patch as they see fit.
Regards,
Maciej
On Dec 12, 2009, at 12:15 PM, Mike Emmel wrote:
The work was done for my employer for their own reasons. I both
understand why they chose V8 and agree with the decision. I'm not
comfortable giving a detailed reason for the decision and I think
thats understandable. A clearer explanation would require a more
formal response and its tied to our products so hopefully you can
understand its not something I want to get into. As a engineer
hopefully you can understand my desire to not go down this path lets
leave it to the marketing team.
However given the nature of the submission regardless of why it was
made its also obvious that getting it integrated into the trunk is far
better than leaving it as a fork. My focus is simply to do my best to
get the code ready for submission and it does contain controversial
decisions.
Its been a long time since I posted but somehow I seem to manage to
get myself on the wrong side of many issues. I think I'm cursed,
chance would not give such consistent results :)
Why this project was done is not the top issue and that should be
obvious if you read the bug report. I've got other problems to deal
with :)
I honestly did not expect this response equating this submission to
other work that needs to be done but given my track record its not
surprising that I'm surprised it must be part of my curse :)
I don't get the logic behind it. I think the assumption is that if I
was not working on this JS engine submission then I would have been
working on other areas that are considered more important however this
is not true. The basic premise is false as I would actually have been
working on something else. I assure you that I don't have the luxury
of devoting my time to the project based on its most pressing problems
if I did, I would of course try and help.
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 10:28 PM, Holger Freyther
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Friday 11 December 2009 23:55:06 Eric Seidel wrote:
I don't see a patch on the bug, but I look forward to seeing it when
it's posted.
I'm surprised that having switch-able JS engines would bubble up on
the list of things to do above things like passing the layout tests:
http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/LayoutTests/platform/gtk/
Skipped
Dear Mike,
is JavaScript execution really the dominating cost in your (page
loading
tests)? When I profile on ARM (not WebKit/GTK+ though) I see
various other
areas of improvement?
holger
_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
