| Summary: | [Qt] Expose Document::firstPartyForCookies() | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | Mohammed Sameer <msameer> | ||||
| Component: | WebKit Qt | Assignee: | Nobody <webkit-unassigned> | ||||
| Status: | RESOLVED INVALID | ||||||
| Severity: | Normal | CC: | hausmann, kent.hansen, kling, tonikitoo | ||||
| Priority: | P2 | Keywords: | Qt, QtTriaged | ||||
| Version: | 528+ (Nightly build) | ||||||
| Hardware: | All | ||||||
| OS: | All | ||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
I'm not sure we can add this before Qt 4.7 since it needs API review. (In reply to comment #1) > I'm not sure we can add this before Qt 4.7 since it needs API review. I agree. Such an API addition is likely to *not* happen within 4.7 timeframe. Qt 4.7 is in beta phase (feature freeze) at this point. That said, I'd put "Since 4.8" in the patch or something like "Since QtWebKit 2.1", considering that will be out before Qt 4.8. Simon, could you please clarify which to usein such cases? Also, for all new API proposals, look for the proper meta bug in bugzilla blocking the next major release. In this case, I'd suggest https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31552 , which blocks QtWebKit2.1 API. Please also careful read http://trac.webkit.org/wiki/QtWebKitAPI for API contribution, if you have not at this point. Is it possible to add an autotest for this feature? Only the lack of autotest is enough to r-. (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > I'm not sure we can add this before Qt 4.7 since it needs API review. > > I agree. Such an API addition is likely to *not* happen within 4.7 timeframe. Qt 4.7 is in beta phase (feature freeze) at this point. > > That said, I'd put "Since 4.8" in the patch or something like "Since QtWebKit 2.1", considering that will be out before Qt 4.8. Simon, could you please clarify which to usein such cases? I added 4.7 because I had to add something but I can change it once I know what to use. > Also, for all new API proposals, look for the proper meta bug in bugzilla blocking the next major release. In this case, I'd suggest https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31552 , which blocks QtWebKit2.1 API. > > Please also careful read http://trac.webkit.org/wiki/QtWebKitAPI for API contribution, if you have not at this point. Checked that and emailed the list. > Is it possible to add an autotest for this feature? Only the lack of autotest is enough to r-. I'll check that once we reach an API agreement. Thanks for the tips. (In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > Is it possible to add an autotest for this feature? Only the lack of autotest is enough to r-. > > I'll check that once we reach an API agreement. > > Thanks for the tips. Please remove the review flag so this patch doesn't show up in the pending list. In addition to an autotest, the documentation could probably be fleshed out a bit too. E.g. when/how would I want to use this function, cross-references to related functions. Code snippets are always nice. This would also make the API review easier since it provides the relevant context. === Bulk closing of Qt bugs === If you believe that this bug report is still relevant for a non-Qt port of webkit.org, please re-open it and remove [Qt] from the summary. If you believe that this is still an important QtWebKit bug, please fill a new report at https://bugreports.qt-project.org and add a link to this issue. See http://qt-project.org/wiki/ReportingBugsInQt for additional guidelines. |
Created attachment 61106 [details] patch I'm attaching a patch that adds QWebFrame::firstPartyForCookies() I think this is useful in order to allow proper filtering of third party cookies.