<div dir="ltr">I mean, because the goal is remove in the future, we need isolate this logic in a separate module to make this transparency on webactivity module, this is what I mean.<div>And the elimination process should be going to the main module (webactivity) which is a kind of controller in this case and then remove 3 or 4 lines that use an interface responsible for providing support for webkit1, I think</div>
</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2013/11/27 Gonzalo Odiard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gonzalo@laptop.org" target="_blank">gonzalo@laptop.org</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">I am not opposed to alternative implementations,<div>if we can "keep it simple".</div><div><br></div><div>This is a workaround for a problem, in the end, we want remove it,</div><div>when is not needed anymore.</div>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<div><br></div><div>Gonzalo</div></font></span></div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Rogelio Mita <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rogeliomita@activitycentral.com" target="_blank">rogeliomita@activitycentral.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Nice!, I quickly looked at the patch and I urged try to encapsulate the all logic of webkit2 and the webkit1 in separate modules, using a luck of strategy pattern or do something polymorphic, but I notice that it is a decision not yet taken (as Daniel says), I doubt whether to spend time on this for that reason, you will say, however when this decision is finally decided, I would like to make note of this style refactor to have clean webactivity module, which is relatively new and keep small, you think?<br>
<div><br></div><div>Regards!</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2013/11/27 Gonzalo Odiard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gonzalo@laptop.org" target="_blank">gonzalo@laptop.org</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div>On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Daniel Narvaez <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dwnarvaez@gmail.com" target="_blank">dwnarvaez@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I think it's good to have this upstream because otherwise changes to sugar-web will easily break webkit1 support.<div>
<br></div><div>I'm not completely convinced we should support webkit1 yet. I'm worried it will be pretty painful to maintain. It should be possible to port webkitgtk 2.2 to Fedora 18... </div>
<div><br></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Maybe, but have many other dependencies to update.</div><div><br></div><div>Another alternative is find what is crashing in webkit2 and solve it, but is out of my knowledge.</div>
<span><font color="#888888">
<div><br></div><div>Gonzalo</div><div><br></div></font></span></div></div></div>
<br></div></div>_______________________________________________<br>
Sugar-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org" target="_blank">Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel" target="_blank">http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><span><font color="#888888"><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>Roger<div><br><div><a href="http://activitycentral.com/" target="_blank">Activity Central</a></div></div>
</font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>Roger<div><br><div><a href="http://activitycentral.com/" target="_blank">Activity Central</a></div></div>
</div>