From: | Murtuza Zabuawala <murtuza(dot)zabuawala(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgadmin-hackers <pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Akshay Joshi <akshay(dot)joshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Neel Patel <neel(dot)patel(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Ashesh Vashi <ashesh(dot)vashi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Joao Pedro De Almeida Pereira <jdealmeidapereira(at)pivotal(dot)io>, Robert Eckhardt <reckhardt(at)pivotal(dot)io> |
Subject: | Re: Showstopper desktop runtime issue |
Date: | 2018-03-22 10:48:05 |
Message-ID: | CAKKotZTWLWDHxKf5ct0hUzVbMzjXTg9sxu-0wgTWgthQ2H2FaQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgadmin-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 3:19 PM, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
> All,
>
> As you know, the 3.0 release is currently on hold as we discovered late
> yesterday that the re-vamped desktop runtime will not run on Gnome 3.26 and
> later. This is because the GTK project, and later Gnome, have removed
> support for the System Tray on which the new runtime relies.
>
> They have replaced it with a notification mechanism, however this doesn't
> really meet our needs as what we want is a place (the tray icon) to attach
> a menu to control the pgAdmin server; we don't really use notifications as
> such.
>
> I see a number of possible ways around this:
>
> 1) Return to the previous runtime. I think this is at best a short-term
> solution, as the re-visited Annulen version of the QtWebKit seems to be
> getting little attention at the moment, and this would re-introduce many
> known bugs caused by WebKit.
>
I would not prefer going back after seeing QtWebkit & QtWebEngine issues
in the past.
>
> 2) Re-work the current runtime code to remove the tray icon, and utilise
> desktop/start menu items to signal the running instance to show the logs,
> configure the server, exit etc. This should work, but will be kinda klunky.
>
+1
>
> 3) Put effort into polishing Joao's Electron based runtime. This might be
> a good long term solution as it would remove the need to have any C++ code
> of our own, and might allow us to use Electron's update mechanism to do
> software updates. The downsides are that we would lose support for dockable
> tabs (new windows only), and it wouldn't work on CentOS/RHEL 6 which we
> currently support.
>
This is a good alternative but there are some downside of Electron,
- It takes longer to start application
- High cpu & ram usage (I have used Slack, Atom & VSCode all of them used
Electron)
> Thoughts and comments please folks? How do we want to proceed? I'm
> currently leaning towards 2 for v3, and possibly moving to 3 in the long
> term.
>
> --
> Dave Page
> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
> Twitter: @pgsnake
>
> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rahul Soshte | 2018-03-22 10:48:37 | Re: Little patch for Runtime build from Top Level Directory($PGADMIN_SRC) MakeFile |
Previous Message | Rahul Soshte | 2018-03-22 10:47:45 | Re: Little patch for Runtime build from Top Level Directory($PGADMIN_SRC) MakeFile |