On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 07:23:04PM +0100, Johan Engelen wrote:
On 26-2-2014 17:54, Martin Owens wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 08:32 -0800, Jon Cruz wrote:
A better task might be to follow-up on Bob's work with the next step and get the DOM exposed.
Sounds like we were all on the wrong page with this one. Several developers seemed to think dom was on it's way out.
This code has not been worked on 4.5 years and has since been a maintenance burden. Over the years (!), bit-by-bit, files have been removed from /src/dom. From my point of view, this code is definitely on its way out.
If anyone wants to work on this again, look it up in the history. If there is some info on this in our wiki, one could add a small note saying that there once was some code out there.
+1
Sounds like this is aiming to solve something we definitely need, but is an unfinished implementation, and without a design or architecture or roadmap written down it'll be hard for someone to pick it up and finish it. Best to move it out of the codebase - it can be reintroduced if/when it's more functionally relevant.
I do think we need to re-engineer how extensions work, and a DOM would be very nice for a number of reasons, but this is something we should focus on tackling in a future release.
Is there any chance that removing the dom/ dir might cause unexpected bugs? If so, let's postpone dropping it until after we're done with the release.
Bryce