cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Bowser <>
Subject Re: [Android] Refactoring for different engines
Date Mon, 10 Mar 2014 21:41:27 GMT
Just added more code.  I have the Cordova bridges working with
Crosswalk.  The thing is that for us to do this, we have to expose a
lot of things that were previously not exposed, because I'm choosing
to not put the Crosswalk code in the same namespace for organizational

On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Joe Bowser <> wrote:
> BTW: I committed it in my repo, not the main Apache one.
> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Joe Bowser <> wrote:
>> Hey
>> I just committed some code based on their WebView modifications that
>> allows you to choose your renderer in the config file with this:
>>     <preference name="webView"
>> value="org.apache.cordova.engine.crosswalk.XWalkCordovaWebView" />
>> You currently have to copy over the *.pak file and the jsapi from a
>> Crosswalk Example project to get this to work.  The next thing that
>> I'm going to do is figure out how to write this as a plugin and have
>> it install on a default project.  Also, right now the bridge doesn't
>> seem to work, and I don't know why exactly.  That being said, the fact
>> that I can choose which version of Chrome/Chromium I'm running with a
>> single XML preference is HUGE.
>> There's definitely a lot more work that needs to be done, but as long
>> as we have something that we can fit into the interface, we should be
>> able to put in things like GeckoView or other third party renderers.
>> The nightmare of being stuck with bullshit WebView bugs may soon be
>> over.
>> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:59 PM, Michal Mocny <> wrote:
>>> First patch they landed, which claims to have min viable xwalk webview:
>>> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 11:37 PM, Michal Mocny <> wrote:
>>>> I haven't looked yet, but did you see:
>>>> ?
>>>> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 10:20 PM, Andrew Grieve <>wrote:
>>>>> First - very excited that you're working on this!
>>>>> Had a quick look. Not sure there's much to be gleaned yet. Once you start
>>>>> in on hooking up x-walk's webview I think it will become more obvious
>>>>> the interface should look like. E.g., does x-walk even have the concept
>>>>> ChromeClient vs WebViewClient vs WebView? Also unsure whether the class
>>>>> should extend android.View as well as implement our interface. E.g.
>>>>> alternative is to have a "getView()" method on the interface. Might help
>>>>> to
>>>>> cut down on file sizes, and API surface, but again, I'm not too sure.
>>>>> I've been pretty hesitant to touch existing exposed members (e.g. the
>>>>> public fields you were referring to) since touching anything public could
>>>>> break plugins. That said, maybe now is a good time to @deprecate a bunch
>>>>> of
>>>>> them and either replace them with getters, or just declare them to be
>>>>> exposed to plugins.
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 6:57 PM, Joe Bowser <>
>>>>> > So, after looking at the Crosswalk code again, I've decided to take
>>>>> > quick stab at making things pluggable.  I don't have a lot to show
>>>>> > it, but with the help of Eclipse (which is why the generated
>>>>> > interfaces look so screwed up), I managed to create some interfaces
>>>>> > we can start shoehorning in other browser renderers.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I'm going to probably start with Crosswalk, because it's probably
>>>>> > most mature primary candidate in the Android Third-Party WebView
>>>>> > thing, and I'm pretty sure the GeckoView will be happening shortly
>>>>> > after.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I don't know how this would work w.r.t. the CLI or our workflow
>>>>> > all, but at the moment, I really just want to at least start to
>>>>> > some headway towards 4.x and PhoneGap day.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > What do people think of this so far? I'm going to try to clean things
>>>>> > up a bit, since we've definitely done a lot of things that would
>>>>> > first year CS profs freak the hell out (i.e. public members in public
>>>>> > objects w.r.t. PluginManager).
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Thoughts?
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Joe
>>>>> >

View raw message