On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 11:18 PM, Jake wrote:
> I would say that is a really bad attitude on Apple's part. Effectively
> telling someone to "shut up" is just bad stewardship. Input from the
> community should be welcomed, because you never know when that person you
> chastise might want to become
I would say that is a really bad attitude on Apple's part. Effectively
telling someone to "shut up" is just bad stewardship. Input from the
community should be welcomed, because you never know when that person you
chastise might want to become a contributor.
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Adel
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Karen Shaeffer wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 05:40:33PM -0700, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Jon Rimmer wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > As well as being in Chrome, custom property support is also being
> > > developed by Mozilla[4]. It is an act
On Apr 7, 2013, at 7:07 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
> This seems rather subjective criteria.
Yes, that’s right, the criteria for becoming a reviewer is subjective, and
should remain so.
-- Darin
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
htt
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Karen Shaeffer wrote:
>
> I am willing to consider if it is practical for me to volunteer to
> maintain CSS
> variables for the webkit project. I'll need a week to make an informed
> decision,
> because I already have a full plate. But I am very interested in webkit,
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 05:40:33PM -0700, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Jon Rimmer wrote:
>
> >
> > As well as being in Chrome, custom property support is also being
> > developed by Mozilla[4]. It is an actively edited W3C spec that is expected
> > to reach Last Call stat
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Benjamin Poulain wrote:
> I don't really see the big deal with revoking reviewer rights. If you come
> back to the project, make a few good patches and show a good understanding
> of the code base, you just get the rights back.
>
This seems rather subjective criter
Hi,
since the Chromium code is getting removed step by step I think that the GYP
build system won't have a shiny future in the WebKit repository. In the GYP vs.
CMake match CMake gets an additional point: There is no WebKit port working
with GYP, but at least 3 with CMake. Accordantly to [1] GT
On 8 April 2013 02:30, Adele Peterson wrote:
> I respectively request that you let WebKit contributors continue this thread
> without further discussion on these points. While these issues may be
> interesting to you, it is not appropriate for you to insert yourself into
> this discussion and
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Dirk Schulze wrote:
> The recent request from Andreas to remove CSS Variables leads to the
> question if there are more features that are not maintained at the moment.
>
> I think it would be honest and transparent if we collect all features that
> are not maintain
I respectively request that you let WebKit contributors continue this thread
without further discussion on these points. While these issues may be
interesting to you, it is not appropriate for you to insert yourself into this
discussion and expect WebKit contributors to explain themselves to yo
On 8 April 2013 01:36, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Jon Rimmer wrote:
>
> I definitely see a value in keeping the feature. However, there is a
> practical problem of someone having to maintain the code. Now that all
> contributors who have previously worked on this feat
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 6:07 PM, Dirk Schulze wrote:
>
> On Apr 7, 2013, at 5:53 PM, Benjamin Poulain wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Timothy Hatcher
> wrote:
> > I think 6 months is fine for deactivating SVN accounts. And a full
> revoke of reviewer status after 2 years of no activity
Hi WebKit,
The recent request from Andreas to remove CSS Variables leads to the question
if there are more features that are not maintained at the moment.
I think it would be honest and transparent if we collect all features that are
not maintained at the moment in a Wiki page. This would give
On Apr 7, 2013, at 5:53 PM, Benjamin Poulain wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Timothy Hatcher wrote:
> I think 6 months is fine for deactivating SVN accounts. And a full revoke of
> reviewer status after 2 years of no activity sounds reasonable to me. We
> could make it easier to get
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Timothy Hatcher wrote:
> I think 6 months is fine for deactivating SVN accounts. And a full revoke
> of reviewer status after 2 years of no activity sounds reasonable to me. We
> could make it easier to get reviewer status again after a 2 year sunset if
> the perso
I think 6 months is fine for deactivating SVN accounts. And a full revoke of
reviewer status after 2 years of no activity sounds reasonable to me. We could
make it easier to get reviewer status again after a 2 year sunset if the person
becomes active again and shows good judgment still.
— Timot
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Jon Rimmer wrote:
> The debate over the syntax of "CSS variables" is long and storied, and is
> marked by misused terminology and misunderstanding in general. Most
> objections from developers stem from a preference for a $foo style syntax,
> as used in the SASS pr
On 8 April 2013 00:54, Geoffrey Garen wrote:
>
> This conversation will be more productive if we base it on fact, and not
> commonly repeated narrative.
A fact about an opinion is still a fact, and the opinion that Google
were dragging the project along is real. That removing features
instead of
+1
IMO, as Dirk suggested, the deactivation of the account is more reasonable
unless the reviewership or committership is revoked,
Gyuyoung
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Dirk Schulze wrote:
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 5, 2013, at 12:00 AM, "Ryosuke Niwa" wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 4,
> As a web developer, I'm very disappointed to see this feature removed. I
> would prefer it to be enabled in Safari and maintained by the remaining
> WebKit contributors. Especially now, removing a feature like this sends an
> unfortunate signal about your intentions for the project and your co
I was asked to provide feedback via the mailing-list and not the bug, so
here goes.
As a web developer, I'm very disappointed to see this feature removed. I
would prefer it to be enabled in Safari and maintained by the remaining
WebKit contributors. Especially now, removing a feature like this sen
On Sun 2013-04-07, at 9:19 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Andreas Kling wrote:
> I'd like to remove the CSS variable feature from the tree now that Chromium
> has left, as they were the only ones shipping it AFAIK.
>
> If we were to keep the feature, my only concern
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Andreas Kling wrote:
> I'd like to remove the CSS variable feature from the tree now that
> Chromium has left, as they were the only ones shipping it AFAIK.
>
If we were to keep the feature, my only concern will be that someone needs
to maintain this code.
Is any
Andreas,
Don't take the ranking in that poll as an indicator. There's no way to
compare interest in Variables against the other specifications, as it was
omitted from the original poll and the only data points are from
write-ins. That's what the gray styling means in the page you linked.
I have n
Hi WebKittens!
I'd like to remove the CSS variable feature from the tree now that Chromium has
left, as they were the only ones shipping it AFAIK.
The feature is awkwardly implemented, the syntax has not been well received by
web developers,
and in the CSS WG priorities poll[1] last October, the
26 matches
Mail list logo
