Skip to content
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

[WebPayments] Introduce OverlayWidget & Use it by PaymentHandler #1654

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

javifernandez
Copy link
Member

@javifernandez javifernandez commented Dec 4, 2024

A new OverlayWidget class is defined to render the payment handler WebContents instance, provided by the web engine, as a result of the call to the Payment Request API.

The tab that initiates the payment request needs to handle 2 WebContents instances, determining which one is active during the process. Hence, The OverlayWidget is implemented as modal dialog, preventing the original web-content to be updated until the payment request is completed.

The TabsWebContentObserver must implement a new WebContentsObserver method, defined to notify Wolvic that the new payment handler WebContents instance is ready.

This PR depends on the PR #143 in the Chromium backend.

Copy link
Collaborator

@mshin-wolvic mshin-wolvic left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM but I'd like to defer to others who take a look with other points of view.

@svillar
Copy link
Member

svillar commented Dec 5, 2024

what should we do with #1646 then?

@javifernandez
Copy link
Member Author

what should we do with #1646 then?

This PR is based on #1646 it's basically the same code, with some cleanup and removed logging and comments.

@svillar
Copy link
Member

svillar commented Dec 5, 2024

what should we do with #1646 then?

This PR is based on #1646 it's basically the same code, with some cleanup and removed logging and comments.

So should we close the other?

@mshin-wolvic
Copy link
Collaborator

what should we do with #1646 then?

This PR is based on #1646 it's basically the same code, with some cleanup and removed logging and comments.

So should we close the other?

FYI, I closed other tickets.

Copy link
Member

@svillar svillar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've done a general review and while the code is clean and easy to understand I have the feeling that it's a bit ad-hoc. Anyway, as I am not totally sure, and provided that it deserves a more in depth review, I'll neither approve nor request changes yet.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants