I support this. Regarding Android extension, there is a already a separate repository but it¹s only used for a few extensions:
https://github.com/crosswalk-project/crosswalk-android-extensions On 14/11/14 14:16, "Kis, Zoltan" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hello, > >Currently >- Android extensions sources, implementing W3C API specifications, are >hosted in Crosswalk source repository >- Native Linux extensions sources, implementing both Tizen and W3C API >specifications, are hosted in tizen-extensions-crosswalk (t-e-c). > >Especially the latter created confusion at least among testers. Given >e.g. the bluetooth, or callhistory, or telephony, or messaging etc >extension, is it implementing the Tizen spec or W3C spec? The spec is >different, therefore the js part is different, therefore they should >go to different extensions. Then we will end up having two >callhistory, two messaging, two telephony etc extensions all hosted in >t-e-c, which is a mess. That mess will grow unbearable once W3C will >specify a Bluetooth API, very likely different from the Tizen spec... >so far we have 3 backends, and 1.5 js file for Bluetooth, but then >we'd have 2 js files, i.e. 2 extensions. > >After talking with Thiago S, Raphael, and Ilkka, I would like to >propose the following, and expect your + or - votes and comments: > >1.) split the t-e-c into two repositories, > - one purely for Tizen-specific API spec implementations, also >allowing Tizen specific ways in extensions handling (utilities / >common logging, app/user data handling etc) > - and the new one for other native Linux extensions, which mainly >implement W3C specifications with mainly upstream Linux dependencies, >usable also on desktop (e.g. including all Bluetooth profile related >functionality from telephony, messaging, contacts etc). > >2.) along similar lines, split the (W3C) Android extension sources >from Crosswalk to a new repository and implement the necessary changes >to extensions deployment. > >To start, I would implement 1) first, which is the bigger need, but >2.) would make things cleaner, too and waits for a voluntary >implementer. > >Also, I'd propose a slight name change after which we'd have names like: >crosswalk, purely for crosswalk >crosswalk-extensions-android, for W3C/Android >crosswalk-extensions-tizen, for Tizen/Tizen >crosswalk-extensions-linux, for W3C/Linux >[ other extensions could follow the naming pattern ] >and we'd let tizen-extensions-crosswalk obsolete. > >IMHO the sooner we do this the better. > >Thoughts? > >Best regards, >Zoltan >_______________________________________________ >Crosswalk-dev mailing list >[email protected] >https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev --------------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Finland Oy Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4 Domiciled in Helsinki This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. _______________________________________________ Crosswalk-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev
