[webkit-dev] Is the wxWidgets port maintained?

[Ryosuke Niwa]

On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Kevin Ollivier <kevino at theolliviers.com>wrote:
>
>  On Feb 11, 2013, at 11:44 PM, Eric Seidel wrote:
> > I think if we as a community are actively interested in maintaining as
> > many ports as we have (and welcoming new ones) we need to come up with
> > better ways to do so.  And clearer policies for what it means to be a
> > port in WebKit.
> >
> >
> > In the specific case of Wx, I am reluctantly agreed that code with
> > only one(?) maintainer is pretty close to "dead" and thus per WebKit's
> > long-standing dead/commented-out code policies should be removed. :(
> > Kevin has been with us a long time, and asking him to "leave" in this
> > manner is saddening.
>
> I actually do agree with most of the points raised, and agree wx being
> removed is probably the most sensible approach. I think, as you said, it
> was more the manner in which things were done that was disheartening.
>

Sorry, I didn't mean to rush or harass you in any way.

> Of course saying Wx is "dead code", begs the question as to what is
> > needed for a port to be considered "live" in WebKit.org?  With our
> > current porting architecture, I would argue that at least 3 full time
> > people are probably needed, and that this should be considered before
> > accepting new ports.
>
> Yes, I think the rules can probably change these days. Back in the days
> when there was only SVN, not being on trunk was a very painful experience
> because branch merging on such a large tree was so problematic, so it
> really was necessary for the threshold for inclusion to be lower. Today
> though, with git, it is a lot more feasible for ports to be a layer 'above'
> the core code. If I were starting the project today, that is probably how I
> would do it.
>

Right. The way I see it, as arrogantly as it sounds, we're not really
kicking Wx port out. It's just that it won't be on svn.webkit.org anymore.
There is no reason why github repository should be a second-class citizen
to the community. We can make a wiki page or other form of documentation on
how to maintain a port on github, and let all perpetual ports live there
instead. Port maintainers can merge & sync up to trunk on their own pace
then.

I agree with you that we should include a port on svn.webkit.org when and
only when that it gets popular enough to have EWS and build.webkit.org bots
since setting up a buildbot via github will be extremely tricky. (Also see
https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2011-September/018075.html)

In other words, I'm suggesting to create a two-tier system where popular
ports with lots of contributors live on svn.webkit.org with build slaves
and EWS bots, and those ports that do not have luxury of keeping up with
trunk changes will live on github.

- R. Niwa
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/attachments/20130212/b1cb3e08/attachment.html>