I think perhaps this depends on how you choose to categorise what has (not) happened to the s60 webkit port. I choose to view it at a company granularity, here's why: It is the same company, the same legal entity, the same policies, same guidelines, same work ethics etc. While you no doubt feel it counter productive to tackle the s60 webkit issues now, and it may be so in the short time, I have little doubt that it will be just as counter productive long term, if they are ignored.
For a quick gain from Nokia, you are advocating Nokia's behaviour toward the open source community who wish to use s60 webkit. You are communicating that it is OK for Nokia to leave a mainline broken for a year, to provide little documentation, almost zero community support and absolutely no communication regarding future development. Nothing. While perhaps this demonstrates your passion for moving webkit forward, it also demonstrates a worryingly fickle approach to open source communities. On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Mark Rowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 2008-08-14, at 21:07, Jack Wootton wrote: > >> I hope this signals a better start for Nokia. Before Nokia can submit >> anything back to the WebKit community they'll have to: > > [snip] > > Speaking as developer of WebKit, if Nokia wishes to resume contributing code > to the WebKit project then they are free to do so, as are any other > developers. I understand that you may be frustrated with how the S60 port > has been handled, but I don't think that it helps the situation to claim > that Nokia must do the things you list in order to continue contributing to > WebKit. The work that Jonni is presenting appears to be based on the Qt > WebKit port, which is completely distinct from the S60 code base, and has an > active community maintaining it. > > Kind regards, > > Mark Rowe > > -- Regards Jack _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
