[Development] ML for QtWebEngine

[Rich Conlan]

Greetings all,

So then, what is/are the right list to be on to keep abreast of QtWebKit technology and where it is going as Qt switches from WebKit to Chromium?

The whole reason I joined development at qt-project.org<mailto:development at qt-project.org> was because it was where those in the Qt Forums said to go when I was trying to tease out details of the confusion around Qt's use of JSC vs V8 vs V4VM and which was used for what in Qt 4.8 vs 5.1 vs 5.2 vs 5.whatever-includes-Chromium). I don't particularly care about QML, just that'd get used through Qt proper and the underlying details.

Thanks,

R.

From: development-bounces+rich.conlan=mathworks.com at qt-project.org [mailto:development-bounces+rich.conlan=mathworks.com at qt-project.org] On Behalf Of Pierre Rossi
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 12:15 PM
To: Matt Broadstone
Cc: development at qt-project.org; Zeno Albisser
Subject: Re: [Development] ML for QtWebEngine


On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 5:36 PM, Matt Broadstone <mbroadst at gmail.com<mailto:mbroadst at gmail.com>> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Zeno Albisser <Zeno.Albisser at digia.com<mailto:Zeno.Albisser at digia.com>> wrote:
Once again from the correct address.

On Oct 15, 2013, at 5:06 PM, Matt Broadstone <mbroadst at gmail.com<mailto:mbroadst at gmail.com>> wrote:

Not that I am really interested in debating such a decision, but I'm not quite sure I see the noise you guys are referring to. I've been signed up to the webkit-qt ML for some time and it's basically just a spam service for status meeting bot messages (which at this point conveys very little information). Is there a secret place where a bunch of emails regarding qt webkit and webegine are ending up? Barring the existence of that, why not just keep the discussions on this list and keep the whole community involved until such a day arises that it really does become too much to handle here? I, for one, support a path forward where I don't have to sign up for another ML, and make yet another filter for my inbox ;)


You might understand, that many people feel quite reluctant to send an email to a list that goes to hundreds of people instead of the relatively small amount of people that actually has a real interest in the project.
The threshold for asking a question or sharing some feedback is higher.

Sure, but that's just how open source works, right? I think we foster a pretty good vibe on these MLs, people shouldn't be afraid to ask here.

So instead of sending a mail, a lot of these discussions are currently just happening in our irc channel where people cannot easily read up on a discussion at all. - I don't think that's something you would be arguing for in favor.
You used to be in #qtwebengine yourself as well some time ago. That is the "secret place" where the information is currently going.

 I don't think people are asking questions on irc because they are afraid of the big bad qt mailing list, I think it's because they can get your attention more immediately and discuss issues in real time.


And the best way to get a good answer is probably to go ask on the appropriate channel ;)

Also, if you consider the current webkit-qt ML spam, then you would probably not want that on the dev ML either.


Well yes, if what you are proposing is that you are going to have a weekly status bot then certainly I don't think that belongs on this list. I consider the webkit-qt ML spam because it isn't actually being used at all (maybe realistically <= 10 emails a month from an actual user, not the status bot, and that's generous). What I'm really getting at is that I think we're kidding ourselves if we think that a webkit binding in whatever incarnation isn't a core offering of Qt, and that such discussions (until it actually does overwhelm the list) should remain as accessible as possible.

But it does not make sense to reason about traffic on qtwebkit. These are separate projects and we do obviously not discuss qtwebengine on the qtwebkit mailing list. Because there you would not expect it for sure.

- Zeno


Matt

Personally I feel it's more a matter of categorization rather than big secrets. I'm more afraid I might miss some important emails because they're lost in a big backlog of noise.
How hard can it be to set up yet another mailing list should be the real question. Given that anyone can subscribe easily [1], I don't think it's radically different from having a variety of IRC channels to discuss different topics.
That being said, I am not that emotionally attached to communicating by email, and definitely not interested in arguing forever to get a list right now so if this is going to be controversial, I'm sure we can do without one for the time being.

[1] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo

Cheers,
--
Pierre

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20131016/adf262a1/attachment.html>