On Monday, May 14, 2012 04:31:12 AM ext Dawit A wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Simon Hausmann > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > On Thursday, May 10, 2012 09:55:47 AM ext Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > > > On Wednesday 09 May 2012, Simon Hausmann wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > After a few emails, let me formulate a concrete proposal: > > > > (1) Andrea Diamantini maintains an up-to-date port of WebKit that > > > > runs > > > > > > with Qt 4, on gitorious.org. > > > > > > > > (2) End of May we remove Qt 4 code paths from WebKit trunk. > > > > > > > > (3) We replace the Qt 4 based bot on build.webkit.org with the Qt > > > > 5 > > > > > > one > > > > > > > > (hosted on Amazon, right?) > > > > > > After some thought, I think we should maintain atleast one stable > > > desktop > > > version of QtWebKit in trunk, and I believe Lars already officially > > > > stated > > > > > that Qt 5.0 will not be fully ready for the desktop, so I suggest we > > > maintain QtWebkit for Qt 4.8 until Qt 5.x is deemed ready for the > > > > desktop. > > > > > Since we only support Qt 4.8 for WebKit1 where not that much development > > > > is > > > > > happening, how much would we gain in dropping that support anyway? > > > > It's a fair question, and I admit I didn't outline that in the proposal. > > The > > maintenance of the Qt 4 port currently costs us > > > > (1) Separate *Qt4.cpp files in a few places (including the much loved > > > > JSC<>QT bindings ;) > > > > (2) A fair chunk of #ifdefs > > > > (3) A bot to maintain (This is a very high cost, especially for Ossy). > > > > I'm proposing the remove the Qt 4 port from trunk because nobody appears > > to be > > interested in taking over that maintenance in trunk. Andrea on the other > > hand > > volunteered to do an out-of-trunk maintenance, which is a great > > opportunity I > > thought. > > What exactly is involved in maintaining it in the trunk itself ? Would such > maintenance require more than one person ? I just do not see how the > out-of-trunk maintenance is supposed to work.
In-trunk maintenance requires keeping a bot green and regularly catching up with changes that happen in WebKit. If we just keep the Qt 4 code in trunk and let it "rot" then for a while people will continue to blindly change the Qt 4 files if they do internal API changes, but that'll stop sooner than later. Then the code becomes bitrot and it looks bad. An out-of-trunk maintenance requires probably more effort in merging itself, but it's completely up to the people maintaining it _when_ they choose to do it and how long it'll take them. > For example, if a 2.3 version > of QtWebKit was supposed to be released from such branch, how would that be > treated ? Would it be considered an official update of QtWebKit for Qt4 ? I doubt that Digia or anyone else is going to roll a new Qt 4.9, so in the light of that it would be a standalone release. Available to interested parties who would like a newer version of WebKit with Qt 4.x. It's in our hands :) Simon _______________________________________________ webkit-qt mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-qt
