6 ms·

The real problem with ActiveX wasn't the technology, it was the API. Code relied on a large, complicated, ever-changing API which was practically impossible fo

The real problem with ActiveX wasn't the technology, it was the API. Code relied on a large, complicated, ever-changing API which was practically impossible for others to duplicate. Win32 was for the most part documented, but even a decade later Windows XP programs are often not useable in WINE. This is the same problem with NaCL. The API is complicated and has a bunch of browser-specific features. Firefox can't just include "pepper.c" and have NaCL support, there's tons of work involved. One result is that Firefox won't support Flash for Linux anymore. Implementing Pepper, even though it's "open source" is more of a hindrance than not having Flash. NaCL is better technology than ActiveX, but uses the same idea of leveraging a OS/browser-specific API as a handicap for competitors.

justinschuh 14y ago
The earliest versions of NaCl attempted to align to the mess that is NPAPI, but that was literally years ago. For the last few years NaCl has used PPAPI, which is well-defined, more loosely coupled to the web, and has a clean versioning mechanism: https://developers.google.com/native-client/pepperc/ https://developers.google.com/native-client/pepperc/
- 0xABADC0DA 14y ago
  I see hundreds of APIs and beta APIs. There's no source code repository. The python scripts to download a SDK refer to Google "private_svn". So Google spends 6 months working on the next version and Firefox and Opera don't even get access to it until the next SDK and are 6 months behind, and they have zero input in how it evolves. That's not how open source should work.
  - jmesserly 14y ago
    Ummm, what? http://www.chromium.org/nativeclient/pnacl/building-and-testing-portable-native-client http://www.chromium.org/nativeclient/pnacl/building-and-test... Source: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/native_client/trunk/src/native_client/pnacl/ http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/native_client/trunk/src/nativ... That wasn't hard to find.
    - 0xABADC0DA 14y ago
      Your "source" link doesn't have source, see: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/native_client/trunk/src/native_client/pnacl/src/ http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/native_client/trunk/src/nativ... The other is a link to a build of pnacl sdk that also doesn't include source (src/ folder is empty). Am I being dense here? Where's the hg, github, code.google link that actually has the source code? I couldn't find where the source is. You would think that would be pretty obvious for an open-source project, like maybe some giant button on the project page. Anyway it doesn't change the point. This isn't being developed as a public open-source project. It isn't designed to be easily added to browsers other than Chrome. Like ActiveX, it's being used as leverage to make one browser better at the expense of others.
      - b0 14y ago
        Looking at the code, you have to check out the source and then run another script to check out the source from Google's private source control system/depot. Why it isn't just in a public repo, I don't know. It looks like it is set up so they can pull it at a moment's notice. I agree with your comments.
        justinschuh 14y ago
        This is just silly. You can't say that you can pull the code from a public repository, and then claim it's private. If it's set up so you can pull the code, and you do so successfully, then it's by definition public. It's totally understandable that you're unfamiliar with how the the projects and dependencies are distributed. The Chromium projects are one of the largest and most complex codebases you're likely to encounter. However, it's all clearly documented and public, with numerous open source contributors. So, it's very disturbing that your first thought is not try and learn why, but rather to insinuate some irrational conspiracy theory.
        b0 14y ago
        Sorry I will clarify with a genuine question: where is the public source code with changelog? It seems like a snapshotting tool, so you check out the stub and then dump the snapshot into it from the depot. (this is similar to how Windows is built inside Microsoft).
  - justinschuh 14y ago
    I don't understand your argument here. NaCl is an open source and openly developed project that anyone is welcome to participate in. The repository, tracker, and mailing lists are all public. In fact, the NaCl team has made numerous efforts to involve the other browser makers (even if they haven't shown interest so far).

justinschuh 14y ago

The earliest versions of NaCl attempted to align to the mess that is NPAPI, but that was literally years ago. For the last few years NaCl has used PPAPI, which is well-defined, more loosely coupled to the web, and has a clean versioning mechanism: https://developers.google.com/native-client/pepperc/ https://developers.google.com/native-client/pepperc/

0xABADC0DA 14y ago
I see hundreds of APIs and beta APIs. There's no source code repository. The python scripts to download a SDK refer to Google "private_svn". So Google spends 6 months working on the next version and Firefox and Opera don't even get access to it until the next SDK and are 6 months behind, and they have zero input in how it evolves. That's not how open source should work.
- jmesserly 14y ago
  Ummm, what? http://www.chromium.org/nativeclient/pnacl/building-and-testing-portable-native-client http://www.chromium.org/nativeclient/pnacl/building-and-test... Source: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/native_client/trunk/src/native_client/pnacl/ http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/native_client/trunk/src/nativ... That wasn't hard to find.
  - 0xABADC0DA 14y ago
    Your "source" link doesn't have source, see: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/native_client/trunk/src/native_client/pnacl/src/ http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/native_client/trunk/src/nativ... The other is a link to a build of pnacl sdk that also doesn't include source (src/ folder is empty). Am I being dense here? Where's the hg, github, code.google link that actually has the source code? I couldn't find where the source is. You would think that would be pretty obvious for an open-source project, like maybe some giant button on the project page. Anyway it doesn't change the point. This isn't being developed as a public open-source project. It isn't designed to be easily added to browsers other than Chrome. Like ActiveX, it's being used as leverage to make one browser better at the expense of others.
    - b0 14y ago
      Looking at the code, you have to check out the source and then run another script to check out the source from Google's private source control system/depot. Why it isn't just in a public repo, I don't know. It looks like it is set up so they can pull it at a moment's notice. I agree with your comments.
      - justinschuh 14y ago
        This is just silly. You can't say that you can pull the code from a public repository, and then claim it's private. If it's set up so you can pull the code, and you do so successfully, then it's by definition public. It's totally understandable that you're unfamiliar with how the the projects and dependencies are distributed. The Chromium projects are one of the largest and most complex codebases you're likely to encounter. However, it's all clearly documented and public, with numerous open source contributors. So, it's very disturbing that your first thought is not try and learn why, but rather to insinuate some irrational conspiracy theory.
        b0 14y ago
        Sorry I will clarify with a genuine question: where is the public source code with changelog? It seems like a snapshotting tool, so you check out the stub and then dump the snapshot into it from the depot. (this is similar to how Windows is built inside Microsoft).
- justinschuh 14y ago
  I don't understand your argument here. NaCl is an open source and openly developed project that anyone is welcome to participate in. The repository, tracker, and mailing lists are all public. In fact, the NaCl team has made numerous efforts to involve the other browser makers (even if they haven't shown interest so far).