On 04/28/2009 03:04 AM, Martin Sourada wrote:
the WebKit GTK port, webkitgtk, has gained some momentum during the
Fedora 11 development and it looks like it might be ready for being
default in Epiphany 2.28 . And so I though it might be worth tracking
this change and helping with testing for Fedora 12 (I have been already
testing webkitgtk in midori and I can see it has improved *a lot* during
the past few months and much more improvements will come in the next
release as well).
Because this falls under the Desktop SIG 'reign', I thought I'd contact
you first, even before trying to sketch some feature page, to see what
are your positions regarding this change. Do we have some specific use
cases that we consider a must-have for epiphany being ship with WebKit
back-end in Fedora in addition to those outlined at the upstream
tracking page (ability to authenticate to koji web interface 
springs to mind)? Are there any general concerns about using WebKit over
XULRunner in Epiphany in Fedora?
The only concern I have is whether it will finally make it as the
default upstream. It's been going to happen for the past few releases.
Maybe this one will finally be it. But then I was saying that 6
months ago, too. If it does, great, and we'll migrate to webkit (the XR
backend will go away when it does, so it's not like there's a real
choice anyway ;-)
On a similar note, perhaps worth a different thread in -devel list,
webkitgtk supports (more or less functionally from my experience)
browser plug-ins using the NP API (swfdec-mozilla,
java-1.6.0-openjdk-plugin, totem-mozplugin, etc). These are usually put
into -mozplugin or -mozilla subpackages. I am not sure how much of sense
this makes when these are actually used both in mozilla based and webkit
based (IIRC the QT port of WebKit supports them as well) applications
and as such the mozilla suffix does not make much sense. Perhaps
-(web)browser-plugin would be a better suffix?
The plugin format is still the mozilla format. But I don't really care