You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I spoke to the upstream developers and they clarified the situation. The "do not use QtWebKit" was based on the assumption that the code was stuck at the 2.12 version from 2016. That is no longer true, and I explained that we have the port working with the latest main as of a few days ago. It probably doesn't help that the library is still being built with a 212 number in its SONAME.
Regarding WK1/WK2: WK1 is being kept around for Apple legacy devices. It's not disappearing any time soon. Almost all of the security fixes are in code common to WK1 and WK2, which means that WK1 is not left behind in this respect. However, I do still want to move to WK2 if possible to benefit from sandboxing.
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
-
@mnutt @quarcko let's move the discussion here.
I spoke to the upstream developers and they clarified the situation. The "do not use QtWebKit" was based on the assumption that the code was stuck at the 2.12 version from 2016. That is no longer true, and I explained that we have the port working with the latest main as of a few days ago. It probably doesn't help that the library is still being built with a 212 number in its SONAME.
Regarding WK1/WK2: WK1 is being kept around for Apple legacy devices. It's not disappearing any time soon. Almost all of the security fixes are in code common to WK1 and WK2, which means that WK1 is not left behind in this respect. However, I do still want to move to WK2 if possible to benefit from sandboxing.
--Elad
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions