Dimitrie O. Paun
dpaun at rogers.com
Sat Nov 9 09:34:50 CST 2002
On November 8, 2002 03:01 pm, Eric Pouech wrote:
> yup, but I fear we'll discover more issues as far we go on (way too
> early to know, until we dig a bit more into it)
True, but it's a good start. Right now we have Nothing (TM). :)
> it also creates a dependency on Wine & Mozilla-win32. I don't feel like
> requiring users to have Mozilla-win32 on their boxes
I hope you're not suggesting we build our own browser :O ;)
But you are right, the Mozilla-win32 situation is far for being
satisfactory, but it's a good first approximation.
Right now we have nothing, and those that rather have nothing
than have Mozilla-win32 on their systems, will see nothing changed.
Those that want the functionality, will install Mozilla-win32.
So it's a win-win for the users.
The ideal situation is if we can use a standard Mozilla installation,
just like Galeon does. But this is non-trivial little project (just
consider that IWebBrowser is implemented in C++ using ATL, and even
if we translated in C, we'll be stuck maintaining it, instead of using
the most up-to-date version from Mozilla, which is not very nice either).
So IMO *if* we can get a solution working with Mozilla-win32 fairly
easily, we should do it. It will be an immediate improvement for the users,
and it will help developers work on the nicer solution by providing them
with something that works, etc.
Come to think of it, if Mozilla-win32 does not work out of the box, we
have bugs that need fixing regardless, so in the end, we should get the
Mozilla-win32 for free.
More information about the wine-devel