I am a peer. Feel free to file a bug against me to remove this port. It served it's purpose. Anyone that wants to keep it alive can do it outside of m-c (long live dvcs).
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:35 PM Benjamin Smedberg <benja...@smedbergs.us> wrote: > I'm going to resurrect this old thread to ask: is anybody currently > triaging bugs the Core: Widget: Qt bugzilla component? I'm trying to find > owners for all of our active bugzilla components, and I'm not sure the > status of this. > > I would support us removing the widget/qt code from the tree unless we have > clear ownership not only of reviewing patches, but the supporting > activities such as bug triage and some kind of continuous automation. > > --BDS > > On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Raine Mäkeläinen < > raine.makelai...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I think that in this context we are talking about mozilla/widget/qt/* > > components and yes we're using those in our Gecko build. We don't use > > QWidgets for Sailfish Browser. User interface of the Sailfish Browser is > > written with Qt QML. > > > > There is more info in the embedding wiki [1] and Dmitry's blog [2]. > > Rendering pipeline has changed after Dmitry's blog post but otherwise > quite > > close to the current state. > > > > [1] > > https://wiki.mozilla.org/Embedding/IPCLiteAPI > > > > [2] > > http://blog.idempotent.info/posts/whats-behind-sailfish-browser.html > > > > -Raine > > > > 2016-04-14 20:38 GMT+03:00 Henri Sivonen <hsivo...@hsivonen.fi>: > > > > > Added Raine Mäkeläinen, who has been committing to qtmozembed lately, > to > > > CC. > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 1:51 AM, Jim Blandy <jbla...@mozilla.com> > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 4:27 AM, Henri Sivonen <hsivo...@hsivonen.fi > > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 7:45 AM, Masayuki Nakano < > > masay...@d-toybox.com > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > So, my question is, why do we still have Qt widget in > > mozilla-central? > > > >> > What > > > >> > the reason of keeping it in mozilla-central? > > > >> > > > >> My understanding is that > > > >> https://git.merproject.org/mer-core/qtmozembed/ still uses it. As > we > > > >> are figuring out how to be more embeddable (see > > > >> https://medium.com/@david_bryant/embed-everything-9aeff6911da0 ), > > it's > > > >> probably a bad time to make life hard for an existing embedding > > > >> solution. > > > > > > > > > > > > This doesn't really answer the question. We can't have code in tree > > that > > > > isn't tested, and isn't used, and has nobody responsible for it. > > > > > > > > If someone is willing to fix it up and get it tested and included in > > the > > > > continuous integration process, then that's fine. But "someone might > > > want to > > > > use it in the future" can't possibly be a legit reason to keep > > > substantial > > > > bits of code in the tree. > > > > > > It looked to me like the code is being used *now*. > > > > > > Raine, does qtmozembed use the Qt widget code from mozilla-central? > > > > > > -- > > > Henri Sivonen > > > hsivo...@hsivonen.fi > > > https://hsivonen.fi/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dev-platform mailing list > > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > > > _______________________________________________ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
