Hi, The reason for not whitelisting QtWebKit is a bit different here: that we don’t want to promise an API that we cannot promise to continue to support. While QtWebKit may continue to limp along for a few years yet, it has been removed from upstream webkit, and has no real active maintainers that I am aware of. The unfortunate reality is that we are not in a position where we can take on the sole maintenance of a web engine (which is a rather large and complex piece of software).
We do offer SilicaWebView (in Silica) as a component that does not expose any engine/implementation details (meaning that we can change the implementation to use QtWebEngine, or Gecko, or whatever suits us / works best for the purpose). It should be good enough for simple cases. If you’re lacking something from it, please ask away :) BR, Robin On 26 Nov 2013, at 02:02, Artem Marchenko <artem.marche...@gmail.com<mailto:artem.marche...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi all One of the rejection messages I've got in harbour is the following: ----- In ./usr/share/wikipedia/pages/MainWikipediaPage.qml the 'QtWebKit 3.0' is not allowed ----- Is WebKit really not allowed? Just double checking as I thought that it's API/ABI is to be very stable at the times when it's going to retire - http://blog.qt.digia.com/blog/2013/09/12/introducing-the-qt-webengine/ (thanks to John Brooks for quickly locating the link). Shouldn't QtWebKit import be whitelisted? Best regards, Artem. -- Artem Marchenko http://agilesoftwaredevelopment.com<http://agilesoftwaredevelopment.com/> http://twitter.com/AgileArtem _______________________________________________ SailfishOS.org<http://SailfishOS.org> Devel mailing list
_______________________________________________ SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
