I have read you. You don't need repeat. In first place, is really bad have this information now, and not 8 months ago, a lot of work was spent porting Browse to webkit, and the result is no so bad like you say. Of course, only few developers are using it, then do not have a real field use. The decision to move to webkit was based in: * the number of problems with gecko * many other projects using webkit. In general more clients for a library, means more eyes and more bugs solved. * all the other comments in this thread... Gonzalo <div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 11:51 AM, lkcl luke <<a href="mailto:luke.leighton@gmail.com">luke.leighton@gmail.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Gonzalo Odiard <<a href="mailto:gonzalo@laptop.org">gonzalo@laptop.org</a>> wrote: > You was replying a thread from Jun/2011. In this time the developers worked > in a Browse > version based in webkit. </div> yes. i'm aware of that. i strongly recommend reverting the changes made. read what i wrote. actually read what i wrote. please read what i have written. allow me to repeat it because it appears that you have not read what i have written. it says "subtle instabilities will result as a direct consequence of fundamental design flaws in the webkit gobject bindings". it also says "excessive memory usage and CPU usage will also result". webkit with gobject introspection is *NOT* ready for public usage as it is fundamentally flawed. as i am the *DESIGNER* of the webkit gobject introspection bindings who has followed their progress i know what i am talking about. l. </blockquote></div>