Last Comment Bug 840928 - Transition to a WebKit engine
: Transition to a WebKit engine
[good second bug] [parity-opera] [par...
: compat, privacy-review-needed, student-project
Product: Firefox OS
Classification: Client Software
Component: Gaia (show other bugs)
: unspecified
: All All
: -- normal (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody; OK to take it and work on it
Depends on:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2013-02-13 02:31 PST by John Drinkwater (:beta)
Modified: 2014-08-13 02:06 PDT (History)
44 users (show)
See Also:
Crash Signature:
QA Whiteboard:
Iteration: ---
Points: ---

patch v1.0 (547 bytes, patch)
2013-02-13 09:00 PST, Marco Bonardo [::mak]
dteller: feedback+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review

Description John Drinkwater (:beta) 2013-02-13 02:31:08 PST
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:20.0) Gecko/20130212 Firefox/20.0
Build ID: 20130212042017

Steps to reproduce:

Following on from the recent announcement by Opera, and upcoming changes to Firefox:
We might as well join the club, stop innovating and make a monoculture out of it.

Comment 1 Timothy Warren 2013-02-13 08:33:51 PST
Comment 2 Marco Bonardo [::mak] 2013-02-13 09:00:16 PST
Created attachment 713443 [details] [diff] [review]
patch v1.0

Damn, I had a patch!
Comment 3 Mike Habicher [:mikeh] (high bugzilla latency) 2013-02-13 09:11:24 PST
We could just run WebKit in a tab using emscripten.
Comment 4 Kyle Huey [:khuey] (Exited; not receiving bugmail, email if necessary) 2013-02-13 10:24:03 PST
Clearly belongs in Core.
Comment 5 David Teller [:Yoric] (please use "needinfo") 2013-02-13 10:25:27 PST
Maybe not. We could port WebKit to B2G using Emscripten.
Comment 6 Kyle Huey [:khuey] (Exited; not receiving bugmail, email if necessary) 2013-02-13 10:27:32 PST
Adding azakai for a feasibility assessment.
Comment 7 Alon Zakai (:azakai) 2013-02-13 10:37:10 PST
Well, if you can port Qt, I guess you can port anything...

But, please no.
Comment 8 Brendan Eich [:brendan] 2013-02-13 11:25:23 PST
I have faith in Emscripten!

Comment 9 Al Billings [:abillings] 2013-02-13 11:26:58 PST
Needs more discussion of possibilities!
Comment 10 David Teller [:Yoric] (please use "needinfo") 2013-02-13 11:37:46 PST
Comment on attachment 713443 [details] [diff] [review]
patch v1.0

Review of attachment 713443 [details] [diff] [review]:

Good start, but needs some testing.
Comment 11 Kyle Huey [:khuey] (Exited; not receiving bugmail, email if necessary) 2013-02-13 11:46:21 PST
I this requires some prior Mozilla experience.
Comment 12 Al Billings [:abillings] 2013-02-13 17:22:58 PST
Maybe we could get Google to fund this for Summer of Code?
Comment 13 Tim Taubert [:ttaubert] 2013-02-13 17:52:54 PST
This is clearly add-on material.
Comment 14 Josh Matthews [:jdm] (on vacation until Dec 5) 2013-02-14 03:57:09 PST
If we used the NPAPI instead, we could get out of process embedding for free.
Comment 15 David Teller [:Yoric] (please use "needinfo") 2013-02-14 03:58:42 PST
@jdm Do you want to compile NPAPI with Emscripten?
Comment 16 Michael Ratcliffe [:miker] [:mratcliffe] 2013-02-14 03:59:13 PST
(In reply to Tim Taubert [:ttaubert] from comment #13)
> This is clearly add-on material.

You are a genius.

All we need to do is make Chrome Frame compatible with Firefox and then redirect all users to when their browser is opened. If users fail to download and install it we can refuse to let them navigate to any other URL until they do.
Comment 17 Lawrence Mandel [:lmandel] (use needinfo) 2013-02-14 07:06:10 PST
I think the simplest solution is to simply slap a Firefox sticker on Chromium and head to the bar. I'm buying. :)
Comment 18 Jason Smith [:jsmith] 2013-02-14 07:07:59 PST
(In reply to Lawrence Mandel [:lmandel] from comment #17)
> I think the simplest solution is to simply slap a Firefox sticker on
> Chromium and head to the bar. I'm buying. :)

I was actually going to suggest to Gerv that I found the solution all of our web compatibility problems in this bug. But that works too.
Comment 19 Gervase Markham [:gerv] 2013-02-14 07:13:24 PST
Unfortunately, many of our web compatibility problems would still remain. I've been privately informed by the Chrome team that if we change our User Agent to copy theirs (which would be necessary for full web compatibility) then they will sue us for trademark infringement. 

I therefore propose that we developer 1024 possible different user agent strings which are similar but not identical to the Chrome one and test them by developing a random user agent string picker and shipping it directly on the release channel, using the relative volume of screams of anguish on to decide which one to use permanently.

Comment 20 Virtual_ManPL [:Virtual] - (ni? me) 2013-02-14 07:54:14 PST
We could sue them for using "Mozilla" in their User-Agent too as it's also trademark infringement ;)
Comment 21 Gervase Markham [:gerv] 2013-02-14 08:27:05 PST
Virtual_ManPL: Shh! Don't give away our legal strategy!

Comment 22 Please Ignore This Troll 2013-04-07 02:12:58 PDT
Any plans to adopt Blink instead?
Comment 23 Mike Habicher [:mikeh] (high bugzilla latency) 2013-04-08 08:14:22 PDT
(In reply to Please Ignore This Troll from comment #22)
> Any plans to adopt Blink instead?

We already are: see about:config "browser.blink_allowed" which is set to 'true'.  Set this to 'false' if you want to switch back to using Gecko.
Comment 24 Gordon P. Hemsley [:GPHemsley] 2014-08-13 02:06:03 PDT
OK, I think the joke has run its course.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.