[bt-devel] QWebEngine

[Greg Hellings]

Hmm, that's rather fast. I can say without a doubt that the major
Linux distributions will continue to offer it for quite some time due
to the number of applications that depend on it. I'll update the build
in Fedora when the time comes.

--Greg

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Gary Holmlund <gary.holmlund at gmail.com> wrote:
> Greg,
>
> Please check these Qt 5.6 release notes.
> https://wiki.qt.io/New_Features_in_Qt_5.6#Removed_Modules
>
> I have downloaded the beta of Qt 5.6 and Webkit is not there. The Qt 5.6
> release date is Feb 9th. Releases like arch will probably have it Feb 10th.
>
> I have both QWebKit and QWebEngine working with BibleTime. There is a
> compile option to choose one versus the other. I will probably make the
> option test the Qt version and switch to QWebEngine for Qt 5.6.
>
> I am doing further testing before I check in the changes.
>
> Gary
>
>
> On 01/20/2016 06:24 AM, Greg Hellings wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure what your intention was for the priority level of this.
>>  From my reading, QtWebKit is intended to remain in Qt but be relegated
>> to important bug fixes only. Qt 5.5 was the first to introduce
>> QtWebEngine, and Qt 5.6 will be the first version to carry that
>> library in Fedora packaging (slated for inclusion in Fedora 24, which
>> is still approaching alpha).
>>
>> I don't think making the jump to QtWebEngine is a high priority task
>> at this point, but it's definitely one we should begin thinking
>> towards.
>>
>> --Greg
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Gary Holmlund <gary.holmlund at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Martin,
>>>
>>> I am partway into allowing either to be used. Assuming I don't run into
>>> to
>>> much trouble with QWebEngine and JavaScript listeners as Greg pointed
>>> out, I
>>> believe we can support both.
>>>
>>> Ubuntu 14.04, their current long term release used Qt 5.2.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>>
>>> On 01/09/2016 11:41 AM, Martin Gruner wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello Gary,
>>>>
>>>> thanks a lot for the information. If supporting both turns out to be
>>>> complex, we could also keep the current state for a 2.11 release, and
>>>> then
>>>> switch completely to the new engine for 2.12 (or just switch right now).
>>>> Which reason do you see to support older QT versions? 5.4 is almost 2
>>>> years
>>>> old.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards, Martin
>>>>
>>>>> Am 09.01.2016 um 18:20 schrieb Gary Holmlund <gary.holmlund at gmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In BibleTime we are using QWebkit (QWebPage, QWebView). The next
>>>>> version
>>>>> of Qt will remove this library. The Qt 5.6 version is due out Feb. 9th.
>>>>>
>>>>> The QWebEngine library replaces QWebkit. QWebEngine was introduced in
>>>>> Qt
>>>>> 5.4. I believe we need to be compatible with both QWebEngine and
>>>>> QWebkit. I
>>>>> am investigating this now.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> bt-devel mailing list
>>>>> bt-devel at crosswire.org
>>>>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/bt-devel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> bt-devel mailing list
>>>> bt-devel at crosswire.org
>>>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/bt-devel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> bt-devel mailing list
>>> bt-devel at crosswire.org
>>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/bt-devel
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bt-devel mailing list
>> bt-devel at crosswire.org
>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/bt-devel
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bt-devel mailing list
> bt-devel at crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/bt-devel