[webkit-dev] Patch to use V8 engine with Gtk port

Maciej Stachowiak mjs at apple.com
Sat Dec 12 13:42:34 PST 2009

I think questioning someone's priorities in an open source project is  
generally not polite, unless there is some direct relationship between  
different tasks. For example, if someone introduce a new feature  
(let's say support for parts of the FooML language) and it had lots of  
bugs, it might be reasonable to ask them to fix some of the bugs  
before implementing more FooML features. But that doesn't seem to be  
the case here.

Ultimately, I think it's up to the Gtk port maintainers and the folks  
maintaining v8 bindings to decide whether they want to support and  
maintain this functionality, and to review the patch as they see fit.


On Dec 12, 2009, at 12:15 PM, Mike Emmel wrote:

> The work was done for my employer for their own reasons. I both
> understand why they chose V8 and agree with the decision.   I'm not
> comfortable giving a detailed reason for the decision and I think
> thats understandable. A clearer explanation would require a more
> formal response and its tied to our products so hopefully you can
> understand its not something I want to get into. As a engineer
> hopefully you can understand my desire to not go down this path lets
> leave it to the marketing team.
> However given the nature of the submission regardless of why it was
> made its also obvious that getting it integrated into the trunk is far
> better than leaving it as a fork. My focus is simply to do my best to
> get the code ready for submission and it does contain controversial
> decisions.
> Its been a long time since I posted but somehow I seem to manage to
> get myself on the wrong side of many issues. I think I'm cursed,
> chance would not give such consistent results :)
> Why this project was done is not the top issue and that should be
> obvious if you read the bug report. I've got other problems to deal
> with :)
> I honestly did not expect this response equating this submission to
> other work that needs to be done but given my track record its not
> surprising that I'm surprised it must be part of my curse :)
> I don't get the logic behind it. I think the assumption is that if I
> was not working on this JS engine submission then I would have been
> working on other areas that are considered more important however this
> is not true. The basic premise is false as I would actually have been
> working on something else. I assure you that I don't have the luxury
> of devoting my time to the project based on its most pressing problems
> if I did, I would of course try and help.
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 10:28 PM, Holger Freyther  
> <zecke at selfish.org> wrote:
>> On Friday 11 December 2009 23:55:06 Eric Seidel wrote:
>>> I don't see a patch on the bug, but I look forward to seeing it when
>>> it's posted.
>>> I'm surprised that having switch-able JS engines would bubble up on
>>> the list of things to do above things like passing the layout tests:
>>> http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/LayoutTests/platform/gtk/ 
>>> Skipped
>> Dear Mike,
>> is JavaScript execution really the dominating cost in your (page  
>> loading
>> tests)? When I profile on ARM (not WebKit/GTK+ though) I see  
>> various other
>> areas of improvement?
>> holger
>> _______________________________________________
>> webkit-dev mailing list
>> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
>> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev

More information about the webkit-dev mailing list