On Sep 14, 2013, at 11:24 AM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> When "modules" of Qt are put on "maintenance", it is basically a synonym >> to "it's unmaintained, just let it die". I am very unexcited about >> having one of those in the tree along the live development from everyone >> else. >> It is unfair for all the ports who put real efforts in the WebKit >> opensource project. > > Previously modules put in maintenance in Qt were already dead because we had > lost the developers during business transitions. This is different, QtWebKit > is still being actively developed and we still have the developers, even if > the primary focus has changed.
If you were to approach the WebKit project today with a new port with the size and scope of QtWebKit/Linux, asking for it to be upstreamed, we’d be unlikely to accept it. > That said, in all likelihood the Qt port will not remain part of WebKit > forever, ... (This being the main reason.) Since you already know you’re eventually going to leave, you could just move to a branch sooner rather than later. It’s unreasonable to expect WebKit to accommodate a port that has no forward-looking interest in the project. -Andreas PS. For the record, I cut my teeth on the QtWebKit port, and I’m sad too. :| _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
