[webkit-dev] Is the wxWidgets port maintained?
dpranke at chromium.org
Tue Feb 12 03:07:33 PST 2013
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Benjamin Poulain <benjamin at webkit.org> wrote:
> I am sorry, I should have given more context.
> There is visibly a growing discontent in the community about the cost
> imposed from small ports. Just two weeks ago, there were 2 threads
> discussing the cost of "peripheral ports".
> I am convinced a part of this is technical. The project has not changed its
> policies while the number of ports was growing. While duplicated code and
> interfaces was okay when there were only 3 ports, it has become a pain when
> we have 7+ ports to updates ...
> In his email "WebKit Wishes", Eric said "It can’t be the job of the core
> maintainers to care about all the peripheral ports which contribute very
> little core code."
I think it was an entirely reasonable question to ask if the wx port
was being maintained, but I'm surprised by how this thread has
There is a lot of discussion going on about the cost of so many ports,
but not much about the benefits.
Speaking personally, even before I joined Google, I was drawn to
WebKit partially because it was used on such a wide variety of
projects and in so many different ways. I was fortunate to be able to
get a job that allows me to contribute to it, and I have found the
work that I've done to help maintain the "peripheral" ports, while not
pain free, quite rewarding (although I would be quite happy if it was
less costly, of course).
My point is that I think that lots of ports are part of what makes
WebKit the goodness it is. Maybe I'm alone here, or at best part of a
minority, but I wanted us to not lose sight of this idea.
More information about the webkit-dev