On 10/03/2016 04:22 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/search?q=gonk seems to contradict your assertion that gonk is well-contained. There are literally references to gonk throughout the tree. Every reference that isn't self-contained introduces cognitive dissonance when someone encounters it. They have to consider the existence of gonk when reading and changing the code. This makes changing code harder and undermines the ability for Firefox/Gecko to "evolve quickly." Even the very presence of unused, self-contained code (like gonk widgets) adds overhead because it can make common operations like refactoring more time consuming. And if someone breaks the code (because it isn't used) and a bug gets filed to track that, now you've introduced overhead for people to triage said bugs. These problems don't exist when the code doesn't exist. That's why we should aggressively delete unused and unsupported code.
First, a better measure is to search for MOZ_WIDGET_GONK : https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/search?q=MOZ_WIDGET_GONK which leads to much less occurences.
Second, even if your reasoning about the overhead holds, that doesn't justify the lack of discussion on the governance side. As Gabriele said, this discussion happened for the Qt widget, why not for Gonk?
Third, the fact that Gonk is not well self contained is hardly a Gonk defect. It's a Gecko issue, due to the widget layer being not well abstracted enough. If we are serious about our embedding efforts we should rather fix that and make it possible to have full out of tree ports.
_______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
