New Gecko package

[Jacek Caban]

Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
>>> BTW why JavaScript doesn't work or any pop-up windows don't open? I know
>>> this works fine with Firefox.
>>>   
>>>       
>> It needs some support from Gecko embedder (MSHTML in our case) and I
>> haven't worked on it yet (with exception of built in alert pop-up).
>>     
>
> You mean that what Wine has now uses gecko for just HTML rendering and
> nothing else?! That you are pretty much rewriting the whole browser from
> the scratch?!! How is that better then what we had before?!!!
>   

Well, it would be perfect if we used it only for rendering... but I
don't think we'll ever reach that state. Just take a look at how deep an
API may meddle with a HTML document. In case of pop-ups Gecko asks the
embedder to create the window. It's not like IE API, which is a complete
browser. Pop-up window is, in fact, a new IE window. Gecko isn't
anything like a complete web browser, it's just an engine. The embedder
creates a window and integrates it with its other windows. In case of
Wine it's not trivial, as this new window should be, in fact, an IE
window with its associated MSHTML object etc.

> The impression you gave about a year ago that Mozilla active-X controls
> needed number of things modified, but other then that it worked fine.
>   

And my impression was that people would like to use apps like Picasa and
Steam out of box with perspectives of getting much more instead of
having a lots of "won't fix" bugs.

> Here I see only most rudimentary things work, and everything else would
> probably never work. And Wine is open for stream of never ending
> security issues, that so far no one even risen.
>   

Well, if you call apps like Outlook a rudimentary thing... Sure, there
still is a lot to do, but with correct architecture we can support more
complex apps. Mozilla ActiveX control will never allow us to run
programs like Outlook. And it's not the only example. Pop-ups, in
particular, arn't too interesting as apps that embed HTML documents
don't usually use them.

> I hate to sound negative about things here, but how hard will it be to
> put things back the way they were before? Or at least make it possible
> to use Mozilla ActiveX controls instead of wine_gecko?
>   

It'd be quite simple, but don't count on my support in it. I very much
disagree with such ideas and I prefer concentrating on improving MSHTML
rather than looking for ugly workarounds. Mozilla ActiveX control may
work only for WebBrowser control but it *can't* work with MSHTML.

Jacek