Re: [dev] surf+tabbed and session management

From: hiro <>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2017 23:32:23 +0200

> That should be done in a separate session manager process, IMHO.

yes, that's what i mean. it just needs to demux the info from multiple
browser processes and then just write them to the file exactly like
opera does right now.

On 4/14/17, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <> wrote:
> On 14.04.2017 16:10, hiro wrote:
>> just for inspiration:
>> check out the format in .opera-12/sessions/
>> plaintext .ini format, keeps history per tab, including title, url,
>> position, etc.
> okay, that's easy and obvious.
> BUT: how can we do that properly w/ multiple processes ?
> I'm thinking of having each tab in its own process, of course.
> There're several ideas coming into my mind:
> a) split it into a whole directory, so each process maintains its state
> in its own file. the filename would be given by the session manager
> (whoever that might be then)
> b) have a little session management server which the individual browser
> processes talk to.
> We'd also need some way for handling new windows/tabs, history,
> bookmarks, etc.
> IMHO, that should be left to the session manager. Lets, for now,
> define this as the big hog that handles startup of individual browser
> processes, session management, bookmarks, history, cookies, ...
> (whether we can split it into multiple programs can be seen later).
> So, we'd need some communication interface between (eg. 9p based)
> session manager and individual browser (in future, that could also
> be used by other applications, eg. editors, video players, etc, etc.).
> * when session manager starts a browser, it passes some communication
> link (eg. fd, socket filename, statedir, ...) down to it.
> * browser will not open up new viewers on its own, but notify the SM,
> so it can start a new browser instance with the given URL
> * perhaps the decision whether to open some url at all, how to handle
> other mimetypes, etc, could also be delegated to the SM
> (the browser should also signal how the user attempted to open it,
> so SM can decide whether to use new tab or window, etc)
> Another interesting topic is extending the context menu, eg. if somebody
> wants to introduce new actions, eg. something like incognito mode.
>> personally i think tabs are stupid. there should be one url and title
>> per process.
> Of course, each tab should run on its own process. But having multiple
> tabs in one window can be quite handy, eg. for organizing things.
>> problem is: you still need one history per tab/window/process.
>> if you want to keep it compatible with having just one single session
>> file in opera format all those different processes have to synchronize
>> via one process that then writes into the session file before
>> requesting a new site or going back/forward in history.
> That should be done in a separate session manager process, IMHO.
> --mtx
Received on Fri Apr 14 2017 - 23:32:23 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Apr 14 2017 - 23:36:19 CEST