Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Amiga Kit Amiga Store Iridium Banner AMIStore App Store A1200/A600 4xIDE Interface

AuthorTopic: Odyssey Web Browser Public Source Code Repository  (Read 8449 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline radzik

Re: Odyssey Web Browser Public Source Code Repository
« Reply #30 on: January 08, 2016, 02:18:00 PM »
Quote from: nicholas;801737
Google's WebKit fork Blink and its V8 JavaScript engine works on Power ISA and is actively maintained by IBM.


If this is better solution that Odyssey why not? If we start on the base that is supporting PowerPC it will be easier for us to have updated browser for NG system. I think there should be some options, Linux PowerPC community have some modern browsers on their systems? And when it is possible to develop one browser for all NG systems it will better. We need cooperation in this case.
Amiga 2000 2 MB Chip ECS, Blizzard 2060/60 MHz 128 MB Fast, Picasso II+, Deneb USB, 160 GB & DVD-RW / OS 3.9
Amiga 1200, Blizzard PPC 233/040 256 MB Fast, BVision / OS4.0, OS3.9,  MOS 1.45
 

Offline nicholas

Re: Odyssey Web Browser Public Source Code Repository
« Reply #31 on: January 08, 2016, 09:17:44 PM »
Quote from: radzik;801740
If this is better solution that Odyssey why not? If we start on the base that is supporting PowerPC it will be easier for us to have updated browser for NG system. I think there should be some options, Linux PowerPC community have some modern browsers on their systems? And when it is possible to develop one browser for all NG systems it will better. We need cooperation in this case.


Can someone familiar with the Odyssey codebase tell us whether adapting Odyssey to use Blink/V8 instead of WebKit engine would be viable? Or have the two engines diverged too much these days? Fab? Deadwood?
“Een rezhim-i eshghalgar-i Quds bayad az sahneh-i ruzgar mahv shaved.” - Imam Ayatollah Sayyed  Ruhollah Khomeini
 

Offline Yasu

Re: Odyssey Web Browser Public Source Code Repository
« Reply #32 on: January 08, 2016, 09:37:48 PM »
I propose this for the sake of ending the arguments:

Step 1, appoint someone trustworthy and knowledgable to dig into this problem. Perfarbly someone who is pro all camps.
Step 2, find all tangable solutions (fix component, use alternative etc)
Step 3, find someone inside or outside the community with the time and talent to fix and maintain component (and not take forever doing so)
Step 4, ask if a bounty will do. If yes then
Step 5, open up a bounty

If it's Fab, Deadwood and/or Kas1e, all the better.

My 2 cents.

Offline radzik

Re: Odyssey Web Browser Public Source Code Repository
« Reply #33 on: January 13, 2016, 05:53:27 AM »
I have asked WebKit developers on the Twitter @webkit and they abandoned and will not support PPC any more.

So it looks like or we fix it in our community or in this situation I think is better to jump into new engine? Because it could possibly that after one fix WebKit , then in some time we must make other one etc.
Amiga 2000 2 MB Chip ECS, Blizzard 2060/60 MHz 128 MB Fast, Picasso II+, Deneb USB, 160 GB & DVD-RW / OS 3.9
Amiga 1200, Blizzard PPC 233/040 256 MB Fast, BVision / OS4.0, OS3.9,  MOS 1.45
 

Offline wawrzon

Re: Odyssey Web Browser Public Source Code Repository
« Reply #34 on: January 13, 2016, 09:58:38 AM »
Quote from: radzik;802035
I have asked WebKit developers on the Twitter @webkit and they abandoned and will not support PPC any more.

So it looks like or we fix it in our community or in this situation I think is better to jump into new engine? Because it could possibly that after one fix WebKit , then in some time we must make other one etc.


wasnt that what you have been told from the start?

btw. on morphzone bigfoot reports to have fixed most endian problems with webkit engine in order to fulfil the js jit bounty he has accepted once, organized by pampers. the question is, what version of webkit engine it is, he fixed, and how could that remain maintained, since the fix sounds like a lot of work and doing that every other webkit release woulnt make any sense. imho the maintability is the first question people needs to ask themselves how to solve, especially if webkt team wouldnt accept big endian patches ushed upstream to their main repo, which seems to be the case.

once this is considered, bigfoot could be paid off, submitting his code to the deadwoods repo and the remaining issues could be taken care of in ccoperative manner. the question is, if morphos users who backed up the bounty so far, want to cooperate in such an affair, even though the resulting source was likely to be released anyway.