Bug 14725
| Summary: | [gtk] The WebKit Gtk+ port needs to be completed | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | Holger Freyther <zecke> |
| Component: | New Bugs | Assignee: | Nobody <webkit-unassigned> |
| Status: | RESOLVED INVALID | ||
| Severity: | Normal | Keywords: | Gtk |
| Priority: | P2 | ||
| Version: | 523.x (Safari 3) | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Bug Depends on: | 14726, 14727, 14729, 14730, 14731, 14732, 14734, 14735, 15561 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | |||
Holger Freyther
We would like to have a complete WebKitGtk port as WebKit is a great rendering engine. Pending issues, design decisions will be created as individual bugs and link to this one.
| Attachments | ||
|---|---|---|
| Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc. |
Holger Freyther
Add the Gtk keyword, even to the curl bugs.
Alp Toker
The GTK+ port is in constant development and will never be completed.
Holger Freyther
That was not smart. You just destroyed the concept of keeping track of what needs to be done for the port....
Where do you want to document shortcomings, bugs, etc. then? If someone asked what needs to be done I always was able to point to bug #14275, what will be the replacement?
Alp Toker
(In reply to comment #3)
> That was not smart. You just destroyed the concept of keeping track of what
> needs to be done for the port....
> Where do you want to document shortcomings, bugs, etc. then? If someone asked
> what needs to be done I always was able to point to bug #14275, what will be
> the replacement?
>
We have several tags for the GTK+ port and even a Bugzilla component now. Our wiki pages link to a saved search that lists all bugs relevant to the GTK+ port. Using a tracking bug like this for a whole port seems redundant.