On Feb 14, 1:09 pm, Benjamin Smedberg <benja...@smedbergs.us
> On 2/14/2013 1:09 PM, Cameron Kaiser wrote:
> > Firefox's desktop improvements help to address point 2, but the loss
> > of Gecko embedding with Firefox 4
> What does this mean exactly? We did end support for gtkmozembed and the
> activex control, but "gecko embedding" did not end, and we continue to
> have people and companies bundling gecko using the low-level
> nsIBaseWindow and nsIWebBrowser interfaces.
If that's the case, then a lot of people (including, apparently, me)
got the wrong idea:
This situation is not at all clear from MDN, btw, which even still
makes reference to PPEmbed. I don't see anything about using
nsIBaseWindow or nsIWebBrowser for this purpose, so I can't evaluate
But when I think of embedding Gecko, I think of embedding it in a
wrapper the way Camino and K-Meleon did, and near as I can determine
that is no longer possible. Am I mistaken?
> It is embeddable, so perhaps you mean something more specific like "have
> a stable embedding API", or "focus resources on making embedding easy"?
> The question is of course who would maintain such an embedding API. If
> you're asking existing core gecko contributors (volunteer or employee)
> to do this, what things should we *stop* doing in order to have time for
> embedding? Or if you're suggesting that we build a new community around
> embedding, how should we do that? Who are the relevant stakeholders, and
> how do we join them together around a common cause?
I'm merely saying that the discussion should be reopened. However, let
me be somewhat explicit. It looks like multi-process desktop Firefox
is not imminent and possibly even not on the horizon given Servo. If
someone(tm) were to step up and present a cogent plan for restoring
binary embedding a la gtkmozembed and likeminded methods, would this
be accepted? Is that a firm offer?