New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
8268849: Update to 612.1 version of WebKit #560
Conversation
|
@arapte |
@arapte Could not parse
|
/contributor add ajoseph |
@arapte |
Webrevs
|
The WebKit 612.1 update looks good. I did a full build and test on all three platforms, including lots of manual testing with HelloWebView. No problems found.
I left a couple minor test comments, but they can be handled as follow-up P4 test bugs.
NOTE: this cannot be integrated until after the jfx17
fork next Thursday (scheduled for 16:00 UTC).
// | ||
// check the title update | ||
// |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since this uses a listener to read the title property, why did this check need to be removed? We might want to file a P4 test bug to look into adding it back in. To that end, do you think it is better to comment this block of code out rather than delete it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have reverted this change and commented the test and created JDK-8269912 to investigate test.
if (currentUrl == "about:blank") { | ||
assertNull("WebEngine.title should be null", web.getTitle()); | ||
} else { | ||
assertNotNull("WebEngine.title should be set", web.getTitle()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Similar to the comment I made in HistoryTest
, is it worth filing a P4 test bug to look at converting this to use a listener? If so, then leaving this in, but commented out might be a good idea.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have reverted this change and commented the code and created JDK-8269912 to investigate test.
@arapte This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks. After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:
You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed. At the time when this comment was updated there had been 13 new commits pushed to the
As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.
|
/integrate |
Going to push as commit 948df32.
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. |
Update JavaFX WebKit to GTK WebKit 2.32 (612.1).
There are two separate commits:
This is change is targeted for JavaFX 18, shall be integrated after fork.
/reviewers 2
/contributor add arun-Joseph
Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Contributors
<ajoseph@openjdk.org>
Reviewing
Using
git
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx pull/560/head:pull/560
$ git checkout pull/560
Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/560
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx pull/560/head
Using Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 560
View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 560
Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/560.diff