<html><head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><br>
<br>
Geoffrey Garen wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:5B5A1EB3-342D-40C1-9A7D-ADF5A267908D@apple.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">Sure. We at University of Szeged who work on WebKitNix from this year
contributed many fixes to various part of WebKit: JavaScriptCore,
WebCore, Tools, …
</pre></blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Thank you for this list. I started reading through it, but I noticed a high percentage of patches that were port-specific build fixes or port-specific features like support for legacy ARM chips. For example, “...on ARM traditional” (<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/142616"><https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/142616></a>). Those patches are cost to core WebKit development, not benefit. </pre>
</blockquote>
I don't want to mis-interpret your statement here. Can you clarify what
you mean by "Those<br>
patches are cost to core WebKit development, not benefit."<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Thomas<br>
</body></html>