On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 7:10 AM, Nayan wrote:
> Hi,
> What's the status of Webkit2? I've built the latest webkit version on
> Windows with --webkit2 option and I see that there is only one process
> shown in Task Manager irrespective of the number of Windows that I
> open.
>
> Reagrds,
> Nayan.
>
> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 16:40:14 +0530
> From: naya...@gmail.com
> To: gga...@apple.com
> CC: webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> Subject: Re: [webkit-dev] Announcing WebKit2
>
> Hi,
> What's the status of Webkit2? I've
Hi,
What's the status of Webkit2? I've built the latest webkit version on
Windows with --webkit2 option and I see that there is only one process
shown in Task Manager irrespective of the number of Windows that I
open.
Reagrds,
Nayan.
On 4/13/10, Geoffrey Garen wrote:
>> Will I be able to adjust
> Will I be able to adjust process priorities to keep all processes of a
> certain MIME type (say application/x-shockwave-flash) to receive no more than
> 15% cpu time or monitor its memory usage?
All process management is behind the API layer, the goal being to shield app
developers from the d
Pardon me for the late entry into this conversation, but as you'll be
discussing this tomorrow in your meeting I wanted to add my perspective as a
Mac developer for your consideration.
Since I'm new on the list, a little background info to help understand that
perspective. Like thousands of develo
On Apr 9, 2010, at 2:40 AM, Xan Lopez wrote:
> Another issue seems to be that parts of the public C API expose
> CoreFoundation, which definitely would be an issue for the other
> ports. I'm told on the side that this was just done as a quick
> solution to have something running and that if there
On Apr 9, 2010, at 2:36 PM, Darin Fisher wrote:
Perhaps we should discuss some of these problems that you perceive
to still exist with the Chromium port at the WebKit conference. I'd
like to understand better.
One thing Adam Barth and I discussed recently was unforking URL
processing.
On Apr 9, 2010, at 2:13 PM, Adam Treat wrote:
On Friday 09 April 2010 02:11:33 pm Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
the "new piece of tech" really is just a new API layer for the Mac
and
Win ports. We are interested in other people being able to reuse this
technology, but fundamentally, this is an
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Darin Fisher wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote:
>
>> On Apr 9, 2010, at 2:34 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 2:33 AM, Adam Treat wrote:
>>
>>> On Thursday 08 April 2010 09:24:32 pm Darin Adler wrote:
>>> > On Apr 8
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote:
> On Apr 9, 2010, at 2:34 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 2:33 AM, Adam Treat wrote:
>
>> On Thursday 08 April 2010 09:24:32 pm Darin Adler wrote:
>> > On Apr 8, 2010, at 6:23 PM, Adam Treat wrote:
>> > > Can someone please
On Friday 09 April 2010 04:53:31 pm Cameron Zwarich wrote:
> In the past we have accepted the Chromium port despite it having a new JS
> engine, new DOM bindings, an overreaching catch-all #ifdef for unrelated
> changes, numerous layering violations, and seemingly unnecessary changes
> or replaceme
On Friday 09 April 2010 02:11:33 pm Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> There were in fact bugs opened with patches attached, and webkit-dev
> was notified before any of the patches were committed afaik. However,
Indeed, but the post to webkit-dev had no link to the patches and no time was
given for anyon
On Apr 9, 2010, at 2:09 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> On Apr 9, 2010, at 2:03 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote:
>>> We seem to welcome pretty much any port that has an active maintainer.
>>
>> IMHO, that's a good thing. I wonder if we should
On Apr 9, 2010, at 2:03 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Cameron Zwarich
wrote:
We seem to welcome pretty much any port that has an active
maintainer.
IMHO, that's a good thing. I wonder if we should "archive" ports that
don't have an active maintainer (e.g., by movi
Which ports are considered unmaintained?
Kenneth
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote:
>> We seem to welcome pretty much any port that has an active maintainer.
>
> IMHO, that's a good thing. I wonder if we should "archive" p
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote:
> We seem to welcome pretty much any port that has an active maintainer.
IMHO, that's a good thing. I wonder if we should "archive" ports that
don't have an active maintainer (e.g., by moving them into a branch).
Adam
__
On Apr 9, 2010, at 2:34 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 2:33 AM, Adam Treat wrote:
> On Thursday 08 April 2010 09:24:32 pm Darin Adler wrote:
> > On Apr 8, 2010, at 6:23 PM, Adam Treat wrote:
> > > Can someone please point to the bug report and the forum where this
> > > developm
> I think the right way to achieve this will be with a simple typedef, but we
> won't know for sure until more ports try to adopt this API.
Looks like Sam went with a slightly different solution:
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37347.
Geoff
__
On Apr 9, 2010, at 7:14 AM, Adam Treat wrote:
On Friday 09 April 2010 06:24:51 am Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
Given what proportion of overall maintenance work on WebKit I done by
Apple, I don't think anyone is entitled to veto us adding a new API
Whaa? Who is talking about veto of Apple's wor
On Apr 8, 2010, at 5:58 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> - Does your new framework require any significant changes in WebCore?
>> Could you briefly summarize them?
>
> No WebCore changes are required - it works with the existing WebCore.
>
Right now WebCore needs to be built with some different
> Another issue seems to be that parts of the public C API expose
> CoreFoundation, which definitely would be an issue for the other
> ports. I'm told on the side that this was just done as a quick
> solution to have something running and that if there's interest by
> other ports in using this we'd
On Friday 09 April 2010 06:24:51 am Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> Given what proportion of overall maintenance work on WebKit I done by
> Apple, I don't think anyone is entitled to veto us adding a new API
Whaa? Who is talking about veto of Apple's work? Rather, I am suggesting
that it would have
Hi,
It looks supporting multi-threaded model.
See WebProcessLauncher.mm for detail.
--
morita
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 9:11 PM, zaheer ahmad wrote:
> hi ,
> why only multi-process and not multi-thread like android. It is useful for
> mobile environments.
> thanks,
> Zaheer
>
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010
hi ,
why only multi-process and not multi-thread like android. It is useful for
mobile environments.
thanks,
Zaheer
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 5:15 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> On Apr 9, 2010, at 3:40 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
>
> On Apr 9, 2010, at 3:36 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
>
>
>> I ho
On Apr 9, 2010, at 3:40 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Apr 9, 2010, at 3:36 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
I hope this post clarifies why the Chromium WebKit port is not
really a viable solution for our needs as it stands today.
It was _very_ helpful. Thanks for taking the time to explain it
Hi!
Your wiki says:
DrawingArea - an abstraction for a cross-process drawing area. Multiple
drawing strategies are possible, the simplest is just a shared memory
bitmap.
Could you tell me more about it? I am working on a parallel painting
feature (GraphicsContext commands can be forwarded to dif
On Apr 9, 2010, at 3:36 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
I hope this post clarifies why the Chromium WebKit port is not
really a viable solution for our needs as it stands today.
It was _very_ helpful. Thanks for taking the time to explain it so
well. (It might be worth moving some of that desc
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 2:47 AM, Xan Lopez wrote:
> I suppose I could wait until you land the patches and see by myself, but:
>
> - In the wiki you mention that one goal of the new framework is to
> provide a stable C-based API. Is this meant as a public API for
> WebKit, the same in all platforms
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 2:33 AM, Adam Treat wrote:
> On Thursday 08 April 2010 09:24:32 pm Darin Adler wrote:
> > On Apr 8, 2010, at 6:23 PM, Adam Treat wrote:
> > > Can someone please point to the bug report and the forum where this
> > > development was discussed by the greater WebKit community?
Hi,
On Apr 8, 2010, at 4:01 PM, Anders Carlsson wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> This is a heads-up that we will shortly start landing patches for a new
> WebKit framework that we at Apple have been working on for a while. We
> currently call this new framework "WebKit2".
Awesome! I can't wait t
On Thursday 08 April 2010 09:24:32 pm Darin Adler wrote:
> On Apr 8, 2010, at 6:23 PM, Adam Treat wrote:
> > Can someone please point to the bug report and the forum where this
> > development was discussed by the greater WebKit community?
>
> The time for that discussion is now. The forum is here
Hey Adam,
A few clarifications...
On Apr 8, 2010, at 6:23 PM, Adam Treat wrote:
Can someone please point to the bug report and the forum where this
development was discussed by the greater WebKit community?
We picked the name "WebKit2" in the hopes of picking something really
bland. Appare
Great.
I think Google chrome has taken a similar approach and have had trouble making
accessibility work because of the inter-process separation, so when we come up
with a solution, maybe they can adopt as well.
On Apr 8, 2010, at 6:30 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> On Apr 8, 2010, at 6:1
On Apr 8, 2010, at 6:19 PM, Chris Fleizach wrote:
If its in a separate process, does Accessibility still work as
expected?
It does not yet work in this rough initial version, but it's certainly
our intent to make it work.
Cheers,
Maciej
On Apr 8, 2010, at 4:01 PM, Anders Carlsson wrot
On Apr 8, 2010, at 6:23 PM, Adam Treat wrote:
> Can someone please point to the bug report and the forum where this
> development was discussed by the greater WebKit community?
The time for that discussion is now. The forum is here.
I suggest we use this mailing list, not a bug report.
--
Hi,
Can someone please point to the bug report and the forum where this
development was discussed by the greater WebKit community?
Cheers,
Adam
On Thursday 08 April 2010 08:58:22 pm Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> On Apr 8, 2010, at 5:47 PM, Xan Lopez wrote:
> > I suppose I could wait until you land
If its in a separate process, does Accessibility still work as expected?
On Apr 8, 2010, at 4:01 PM, Anders Carlsson wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> This is a heads-up that we will shortly start landing patches for a new
> WebKit framework that we at Apple have been working on for a while. We
> c
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 2:52 AM, Darin Adler wrote:
> As I understand it, the goal is to have a C API that is suitable and works
> well cross platform for all the many platform independent operations; it is
> indeed analogous the one for JavaScriptCore in that respect.
>
> When you refer to a “se
On Apr 8, 2010, at 5:47 PM, Xan Lopez wrote:
I suppose I could wait until you land the patches and see by myself,
but:
- In the wiki you mention that one goal of the new framework is to
provide a stable C-based API. Is this meant as a public API for
WebKit, the same in all platforms (like
On Apr 8, 2010, at 5:47 PM, Xan Lopez wrote:
> - In the wiki you mention that one goal of the new framework is to provide a
> stable C-based API. Is this meant as a public API for WebKit, the same in all
> platforms (like JSC), or a stable internal API for embedders to use in order
> to impleme
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:01 AM, Anders Carlsson wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> This is a heads-up that we will shortly start landing patches for a new
> WebKit framework that we at Apple have been working on for a while. We
> currently call this new framework "WebKit2".
>
> WebKit2 is designed from
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 4:25 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri <
barbi...@profusion.mobi> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Anders Carlsson
> wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > This is a heads-up that we will shortly start landing patches for a new
> > WebKit framework that we at Apple have been
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Anders Carlsson wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> This is a heads-up that we will shortly start landing patches for a new
> WebKit framework that we at Apple have been working on for a while. We
> currently call this new framework "WebKit2".
>
> WebKit2 is designed from
43 matches
Mail list logo
