[webkit-dev] Adding ENABLE_FLEXBOX to WebCore

[Darin Fisher]

OK, but it is very nice to ship what you test (i.e., avoid the need to
create a separate build of WebCore for testing).  Continuous integration is
also nice (i.e., no branches).

Marrying those constraints leads to runtime enabling features.  This is
precisely the recipe Chromium uses to great avail for features exposed
through JS.  Why wouldn't we want the same for CSS features?

-Darin


On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Adam Barth <abarth at webkit.org> wrote:

> The difference between runtime and compile time enabling seems like a red
> herring.  The issue is more which configurations to test where and to ship
> where, not how to do the configuring.
>
> Adam
>  On Jun 8, 2011 5:25 PM, "Darin Fisher" <darin at chromium.org> wrote:
> > Are you referring to the additional cost of maintaining different test
> > expectations between the two configs? Agreed, that would suck.
> >
> > So, how painful would it be to add runtime enablement support for new CSS
> > features?
> > On Jun 8, 2011 5:16 PM, "Dirk Pranke" <dpranke at chromium.org> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Darin Fisher <darin at chromium.org>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 4:59 PM, James Robinson <jamesr at google.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Darin Fisher <darin at chromium.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Oh, okay. Why do we have override_features.gypi then?
> >>>>
> >>>> We don't, Adam tried to remove it earlier this week and was foiled by
> > some
> >>>> weird complex failure. We should get rid of it ASAP.
> >>>
> >>> OK ... I guess things have changed.
> >>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regardless, it seems like we could create a mechanism so that the
> > result
> >>>>> of build-webkit
> >>>>> uses different ENABLE_ options than a stock Chromium build. There's a
> >>>>> trivial way to switch
> >>>>> b/w the two in the GYP files.
> >>>>
> >>>> There's danger in testing a different set of ENABLE_s than we ship
> > unless
> >>>> we are really confident in understanding how the ENABLE_'d code
> > interacts
> >>>> with the rest of the codebase.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure that is a big deal. The Chromium build bots at
> >>> build.chromium.org run DRT built from a Chromium checkout. The
> >>> build.webkit.org bots are intended to provide compile and DRT feedback
> > for
> >>> the Chromium port that is visible to the rest of the WebKit community.
> > If
> >>> the configs between build.webkit.org and build.chromium.org differ,
> maybe
> >>> that is not so bad?
> >>
> >> Boy, that seems like a recipe for pain from my point of view. I'd be
> >> against this unless there was a *big* win for some reason.
> >>
> >> -- Dirk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/attachments/20110608/813b1f8b/attachment.html>