Cleaning House
lists.webkit.org
lists.webkit.org
I recall him working on submitting a patch (which I think got accepted after a few necessary revisions) to WebKit, and him explaining to me how WebKit is behind both Safari and Chrome, and how even though the companies and its fanboys are grabbing at each others' throats, the developers are happily working together, conversing casually on the mailing list and on twitter. It reminded me of the great sports rivalries, where the fans and media rile up the heat and hatred, but the players themselves remain respectful to their brethren on the other side of the lines.
In the years since, I've been able to help out some OSS projects as a non-coder, and I look back and think that learning about the collaboration behind WebKit certainly nudged me a little bit towards this direction.
It's a bit sad for me to see the Google and Apple teams split in this manner, since it was such a visible and prominent example of how OSS can bridge corporate divides, but I am hopeful that down the line we'll all look back at this moment in history with fondness.
The fork happenned to a large extent for a want of control on the code base. So, it's mostly technical. WebKit has atleast 8 ports in trunk. Every part of it - networking, os, javascript engine, bindings, plugins, graphics has been hacked to death. And it has abstractions galore.
Now imagine you worked for WebKit. If you wanted to commit something, you had to test it against 8 ports. Many of these ports are cross platform. So, you are really talking about like gazillion combinations (mac, windows, linux, retina vs non-retina, os versions). It was not a happy place to develop and everyone in the project recognized this.
The pace of development was getting very slow because of the above. Apple faced this and said WebKit2 is all theirs and nobody else should really use it. Google faced this and decided to fork.
In short, most webkit devs are happy about this. It's worked out well for everyone.
I can't say the same about front-end web devs. They are potentially looking at yet another browser family that can have its own quirks (sure, safari and chrome were different enough already, but this fork means that now they can be different at a lower level).
Google already basically ran their own fork of WebKit — it most definitely was not the same codebase in Chrome and Safari. Now they've just made it a clean, official one. Let's not freak out about problems that may never exist and certainly don't yet.
So yeah, they will probably differentiate even more now.
Of course this is not necessarily that limit case but it's not hard to imagine that what everybody is saying is perfectly technically true, and all that's really happening is that the fork that has already long since happened is merely being formally acknowledged, and now the shambling horror can be surgically partitioned and reassembled into two fine upstanding citizens. (And an extra kidney. How long has that been here‽)
Webkit guys want to remove support for V8 (and any JS engine apart from their own JSC engine) due to maintenance and complexity conerns BUT:
* Qt 5.x uses V8 in Qt's Webkit
* Samsung uses V8 (In a unofficial fork of WebkitGTK+ by the looks of it).
* Oracle want to add support for their own JS Engine to webkit.
Resolving this one amicably should be interesting. If you want to use Webkit on windows with anything other than JSC it looks like you might want to start investigating blink in detail.
* I probably am.
http://www.arewefastyet.com/#machine=12&view=breakdown...
each beats the other on some benchmarks. Is there another reason for your preference?
I am guessing there are probably non-technical points (eas of commit access, architecture, roadmap etc)
[1] Nashorn - http://openjdk.java.net/projects/nashorn/
There will be no-one to maintain it and a lot of the friction between the platforms was the JS engines. Both WebKit and Blink are excited to rip out the conflicting codebases and I think they've both learned lessons about maintaining multiple JS engines.
I'm hoping for the former, but human nature being what it is...
They will all still have to cooperate on standards committees and I'm sure there will be a lot of interaction- the browser community is fairly small and all of the companies collaborate to some degree (even Microsoft, somewhat ;).
No reason to burn bridges, I see it as more of a sad separation of ways- each knowing it was for the best.
https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2013-April/024...
It seems like it up to QT port to handle windows.
https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Chromium_Embedded_F...
(Unrelated: their embedded Chromium seems to be hard-coded to Windows-like shortcuts; even in the address bar)
I think quite a few use Webkit directly but there are some middle-ware libraries for the purpose. Awesomium I belive is reasonably frequently used. Their website says that it uses "Chromium/WebKit" though so I suppose that they may be moving to Blink as well.
Or will Webkit2 and Blink still pull changes and improvements in from Webkit?
So you're trying to sound uneducated?
Last I checked, Safari has 544 million users, whereas Chrome has 260 million users.
(There are about 1.4 billion personal computers. Chrome is on 16.45% (230 million) of those computers, Safari is on 5.31% (74 million) of those computers. There are about 30 million Android devices with Chrome. There are 470 million iOS devices with Safari.)
Given how fast the mobile market is growing (while the Windows PC market is shrinking), and given that many Android devices are sold with other browsers than Chrome, I'd say the gap is only going to get wider.