<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>It looks like I missed some discussion here. So, I'm repeating my
question, why would we like to remove Xulrunner and/or deprecate
VPE? Just want to understand if there is some real problem and our
Xulrunner stuff blocks us to solve it or this is just for
cleanness sake.<br>
</p>
Thanks.<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/29/2016 03:28 AM, Ilya Buziuk
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CACrcdnfAZ9FYr4Za6912n8sj0Qxfzy1ZKVUCpShFtCqztWv4=Q@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Hi, Aleksandr
<div>Alexey has already moved this discussion to jbosstools-dev.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Unfortunately, I do not have Webkit POC ready to hand, but
I think I remember the approach. Basically, the WebKit based
transformation was done via SWT BrowserFunction[1] and the
performance was much worse in comparison with the DOM API. If
you want to figure out how the current Xulrunner based
implementation work, you should probably start with tests[2]
that cover things like mapping between source jsf / jsp tags
and visual part via DOM API. However, I still want to put my 2
cents in this discussion.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Let's face the bullet - JSF is dying technology, and
spending any time on new development is simply nonsensical
IMO. Even if eventually a better WebKit based VPE will be
created (which is doubtful because it was developed by big
team ~ 10 developers for a couple of years) it will have very
little value for both community and business. For now the only
request from the community was - "please, leave it as is". </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If SWT will drop GTK 2 support than we will have to
deprecate it on this Linux. But it worth mentioning that all
Linux distros are just a couple of percents of the tools user
base and our target audience ~ 85 - 90 % is Windows
developers. For me it is also not clear why it is important to
deprecate it right now ? We already had this discussion and
decided not to do it in 2015, so I can not come up with a
reason why should it be done in 2016. Just to be clear, I am
not against deprecation, I am just saying that we should think
twice before doing it and get some agreement about Xulrunner
future, so that we will not be returning to this discussion
again and again.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>[1] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://help.eclipse.org/kepler/index.jsp?topic=%2Forg.eclipse.platform.doc.isv%2Freference%2Fapi%2Forg%2Feclipse%2Fswt%2Fbrowser%2FBrowserFunction.html"
target="_blank">http://help.eclipse.org/<wbr>kepler/index.jsp?topic=%2Forg.<wbr>eclipse.platform.doc.isv%<wbr>2Freference%2Fapi%2Forg%<wbr>2Feclipse%2Fswt%2Fbrowser%<wbr>2FBrowserFunction.html</a></div>
<div>[2] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://github.com/jbosstools/jbosstools-vpe/blob/master/tests/org.jboss.tools.vpe.base.test/src/org/jboss/tools/vpe/base/test/VpeTest.java#L340">https://github.com/jbosstools/jbosstools-vpe/blob/master/tests/org.jboss.tools.vpe.base.test/src/org/jboss/tools/vpe/base/test/VpeTest.java#L340</a> </div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 8:07 AM,
Aleksandar Kurtakov <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:akurtako@redhat.com"
target="_blank">akurtako@redhat.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Adding Max and Alexey
(maybe we should move to the mailing list?) and dropping
Jeff to not spam him.<br>
<span><br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
> From: "Aleksandar Kurtakov" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:akurtako@redhat.com" target="_blank">akurtako@redhat.com</a>><br>
> To: "Ilya Buziuk" <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ibuziuk@redhat.com" target="_blank">ibuziuk@redhat.com</a>><br>
> Cc: "Nick Boldt" <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nboldt@redhat.com" target="_blank">nboldt@redhat.com</a>>,
"Leo Ufimtsev" <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:lufimtse@redhat.com" target="_blank">lufimtse@redhat.com</a>>,
"Jeff Johnston" <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jjohnstn@redhat.com" target="_blank">jjohnstn@redhat.com</a>><br>
</span>
<div>
<div>> Sent: Thursday, 29 September, 2016 9:04:42 AM<br>
> Subject: Re: Do we still need Xulrunner in
Devstudio?<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> ----- Original Message -----<br>
> > From: "Ilya Buziuk" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ibuziuk@redhat.com" target="_blank">ibuziuk@redhat.com</a>><br>
> > To: "Aleksandar Kurtakov" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:akurtako@redhat.com" target="_blank">akurtako@redhat.com</a>><br>
> > Cc: "Nick Boldt" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nboldt@redhat.com" target="_blank">nboldt@redhat.com</a>>,
"Leo Ufimtsev" <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:lufimtse@redhat.com" target="_blank">lufimtse@redhat.com</a>>,<br>
> > "Jeff Johnston" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jjohnstn@redhat.com" target="_blank">jjohnstn@redhat.com</a>><br>
> > Sent: Wednesday, 28 September, 2016 8:23:47
PM<br>
> > Subject: Re: Do we still need Xulrunner in
Devstudio?<br>
> ><br>
> > Basically, jsf tags can not be displayed
as-is and be parsed correctly in<br>
> > browser like html, due to the fact that it
is server side technology. So,<br>
> > the algorithm for VPE is the following: the
content is rendered and all<br>
> > jsf tags are parsed through a set of
templates via the native DOM API which<br>
> > is available only in particular older
versions of XULRunner. So, in order<br>
> > to use Webkit or other engine and migrate
all VPE features, reimplementing<br>
> > all of those temlpate transformations is
required. Plus not to forget the<br>
> > performance thing - processing might take a
long time (I think we had some<br>
> > WebKit POC but performance was just
unacceptable). This is not a trivial<br>
> > task at all and I do believe that we have
no resources for doing it - VPE<br>
> > component's code base is one of the biggest
(if not the biggest) across<br>
> > tools.<br>
><br>
> That's exactly the kind of info I was looking
for. Can you point me to the<br>
> transformations used for the xulrunner? Sorry for
being lazy but it's<br>
> foreing land for me so I would rather not lose
time lurking around.<br>
> Do you have a pointer to the WebKit POC? It might
be interested to reach out<br>
> to the desktop team (there is webkit developer
there) with all the info so<br>
> maybe they can hint us how to achieve what's
needed if latest webkit doesn't<br>
> fullfill the needs.<br>
><br>
> > In a nutshell - after reimplementing there
will be the same, or less<br>
> > powerful, VPE with more bugs and poor
performance.<br>
><br>
> That might be true now but you should think a bit
further in time. In the not<br>
> so distant future (2018 release most probably, if
not 2019 for sure) SWT<br>
> itself will drop support for running on GTK 2.x
and that would be<br>
> effectively the end of this plugin if no action
taken.<br>
><br>
><br>
> ><br>
> > On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 6:42 PM, Aleksandar
Kurtakov <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:akurtako@redhat.com" target="_blank">akurtako@redhat.com</a>><br>
> > wrote:<br>
> ><br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > ----- Original Message -----<br>
> > > > From: "Ilya Buziuk" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ibuziuk@redhat.com" target="_blank">ibuziuk@redhat.com</a>><br>
> > > > To: "Nick Boldt" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nboldt@redhat.com" target="_blank">nboldt@redhat.com</a>><br>
> > > > Cc: "Aleksandar Kurtakov" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:akurtako@redhat.com" target="_blank">akurtako@redhat.com</a>>,
"Leo Ufimtsev" <<br>
> > > <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:lufimtse@redhat.com" target="_blank">lufimtse@redhat.com</a>>,
"Jeff Johnston"<br>
> > > > <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jjohnstn@redhat.com" target="_blank">jjohnstn@redhat.com</a>><br>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, 28 September,
2016 7:19:24 PM<br>
> > > > Subject: Re: Do we still need
Xulrunner in Devstudio?<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > Actually, we planned to remove
xulrunner and deprecate VPE some time<br>
> > > > ago<br>
> > > > and leave only VPV as a WYSIWYG
html editor.<br>
> > > As someone not familiar with the topic
I don't see xulrunner and VPE<br>
> > > deprecation that closely coupled. What
is the reason for that? What's<br>
> > > preventing to achieve it with webkit?
Do you extend SWT Browser API<br>
> > > somehow?<br>
> > > Please give all the details you can
think of so I can get better<br>
> > > understanding of the issue/reasons.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > > However, as soon as we gave a<br>
> > > > shout out about this on <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://tools.jboss.org"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">tools.jboss.org</a>
the first comment was:<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > Nice. The reason I used JBoss
Tools was the Visual Editor for JSF,<br>
> > > > > especially for the Visual
parts, which was not perfect but was good<br>
> > > enough<br>
> > > > > to have it. Will you have
alternatives for that ? [1]<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > It was decided that we need to
slow down with this process. I can not<br>
> > > > say<br>
> > > > if it is a high time for doing
this assuming that some people actually<br>
> > > use<br>
> > > > it. Furthermore, some people treat
it as a killer feature for JSF that<br>
> > > only<br>
> > > > one IDE is providing. So, we need
to think twice before doing it.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > [1] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://tools.jboss.org/blog/2015-04-02-devstudio-8.1.0.GA-"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://tools.jboss.org/blog/20<wbr>15-04-02-devstudio-8.1.0.GA-</a><br>
> > > for-luna.html<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 5:40 PM,
Nick Boldt <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nboldt@redhat.com" target="_blank">nboldt@redhat.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > > On the Eclipse team call
today, the question of why we need Xulrunner<br>
> > > > > was brought up again.<br>
> > > > ><br>
> > > > > As I understand it, the only
reason we still include Xulrunner is for<br>
> > > > > the Visual Page Editor. But
Alex pointed out today that Xulrunner<br>
> > > > > only<br>
> > > > > works on GTK2, which means a
user has to explicity disable GTK3 in<br>
> > > > > order for Xulrunner to be
used, as these days GTK3 is the default<br>
> > > > > OOTB<br>
> > > > > implementation on the
platforms we support (Fedora 24/25, RHEL7,<br>
> > > > > etc.).<br>
> > > > ><br>
> > > > > So... is it time to remove
Xulrunner from the Devstudio dependencies,<br>
> > > > > if most people are not even
seeing it used?<br>
> > > > ><br>
> > > > > Alex suggested it might be
useful to set up a call to discuss this in<br>
> > > > > more depth. Is there a good
time tomorrow or Friday you guys would<br>
> > > > > like to meet to discuss this,
if it can't be resolved asynchronously<br>
> > > > > via email?<br>
> > > > ><br>
> > > > > Whatever we decide here, we
should make sure we announce this on the<br>
> > > > > jbosstools-dev@ list.<br>
> > > > ><br>
> > > > > --<br>
> > > > > Nick Boldt :: JBoss by Red
Hat<br>
> > > > > Productization Lead :: JBoss
Tools & Dev Studio<br>
> > > > > <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://nick.divbyzero.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://nick.divbyzero.com</a><br>
> > > > ><br>
> > > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > --<br>
> > > Alexander Kurtakov<br>
> > > Red Hat Eclipse team<br>
> > ><br>
> ><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Alexander Kurtakov<br>
> Red Hat Eclipse team<br>
><br>
<br>
--<br>
Alexander Kurtakov<br>
Red Hat Eclipse team<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>