about OB

[stephane ducasse]

Hi colin

We are trying to understand how we can have advanced browsers based on
OB.
Over the years, david extended patched the system. Now that you are
pushing OB again, I would like to see how
we could have a solution where
- code is not duplicated
- the OB kernel is not impacted

I discussed with david about the idea of lukas that david should not
extend OB standard but copy it into OB Package Browser.
David is telling me that this is not really a good idea since he will
duplicate a lot of code and that after
he will have a desynchronised version.

For me the best solution would be see is what are the key hooks that
david need to support his browser
and how can these hooks be integrated in the core so that his browser
can be cleanly built.

I have the impression that you looked and integrated some of the items
of OB-Enhancement
but I also aslo have the impression that David does not know it well.
Do you have a list of the points you integrated?
David did you look at the more recent version of OB? What are the key
hooks that you would need?

I hope that this email will bring a bit more communication in our too
small community.

Stef

[Hernán Morales Durand]

Thanks Stephane to bring up this topic.
I'd like to suggest to set up a bug tracker for OmniBrowser
developement. The wiki section could include a description for each
distribution like "OB Package Browser" and related packages like
OB-Enhancement, OB-Standard (what should/not should include each
one?). This way both developers will avoid duplicating efforts and
users will have a better developement tool.
Cheers,

Hernán

2009/10/10 stephane ducasse <stephane...@gmail.com>:

[Colin Putney]

On 10-Oct-09, at 12:55 AM, stephane ducasse wrote:

> For me the best solution would be see is what are the key hooks that
> david need to support his browser
> and how can these hooks be integrated in the core so that his
> browser can be cleanly built.

Yes, this would certainly be the best solution, provided the hooks
don't impact performance when they're not being used.

A while back, I asked on this list what features from OB-Enhancements
people would like to see back-ported to the core distribution. There
were two responses: Traits support and (maybe) something like Roel's
DuoBrowser.

Traits support is really hairy so I haven't investigated that yet, but
I do remember that there was a separate package for adding Traits
support to OB. I'd like to keep it in a separate package if possible,
so we don't complicate the browser for folks that are not using Traits.

Colin

[Colin Putney]

On 11-Oct-09, at 8:59 AM, David Roethlisberger wrote:

> ok, I can come up with a list of hooks I need for those things
> planned to remain outside the core. But for this I first want to
> know what Colin does not plan to integrate.

Ugh... I can tell this is going to be ugly. Neither of us knows what
the other has done very well, and I thing both of us are going to have
to dig into the code to see what the state of things is.

Why don't we start here: can you give me a list of the essential
*features* of OB-Enhancements? What user-visible things did you
implement?

Colin

[Colin Putney]

On 10-Oct-09, at 3:06 PM, Hernán Morales Durand wrote:

> The wiki section could include a description for each
> distribution like "OB Package Browser" and related packages like
> OB-Enhancement, OB-Standard (what should/not should include each
> one?). This way both developers will avoid duplicating efforts and
> users will have a better developement tool.

That's a really good idea, thanks Hernán.

Any volunteers to start writing up short summaries of each of the
packages? This would be a good way to get the Wiki started at Google
Code.

Colin

[Hernán Morales Durand]

I can write some mini-howto's or notes next week (now I have a
terrible molar tooth infection).
Cheers,

Hernán

2009/10/15 Colin Putney <cpu...@wiresong.ca>:

[stephane ducasse]

Yes!
David please make a list
from most important to less important one.