# Implementation Plan: Native WebKit Browser Backend **Branch**: `003-webkit2gtk-migration` | **Date**: 2025-01-21 | **Spec**: [spec.md](spec.md) **Input**: Feature specification from `/home/brice/dev/projects/dumb-browser/specs/003-webkit2gtk-migration/spec.md` ## Execution Flow (/plan command scope) ``` 1. Load feature spec from Input path → If not found: ERROR "No feature spec at {path}" 2. Fill Technical Context (scan for NEEDS CLARIFICATION) → Detect Project Type from context (web=frontend+backend, mobile=app+api) → Set Structure Decision based on project type 3. Evaluate Constitution Check section below → If violations exist: Document in Complexity Tracking → If no justification possible: ERROR "Simplify approach first" → Update Progress Tracking: Initial Constitution Check 4. Execute Phase 0 → research.md → If NEEDS CLARIFICATION remain: ERROR "Resolve unknowns" 5. Execute Phase 1 → contracts, data-model.md, quickstart.md, agent-specific template file (e.g., `CLAUDE.md` for Claude Code, `.github/copilot-instructions.md` for GitHub Copilot, or `GEMINI.md` for Gemini CLI). 6. Re-evaluate Constitution Check section → If new violations: Refactor design, return to Phase 1 → Update Progress Tracking: Post-Design Constitution Check 7. Plan Phase 2 → Describe task generation approach (DO NOT create tasks.md) 8. STOP - Ready for /tasks command ``` **IMPORTANT**: The /plan command STOPS at step 7. Phases 2-4 are executed by other commands: - Phase 2: /tasks command creates tasks.md - Phase 3-4: Implementation execution (manual or via tools) ## Summary Replace Wails framework with direct WebKit2GTK bindings to gain full control over browser engine capabilities, maintain all existing functionality while removing framework limitations, and create custom C Go bindings in a pkg/ package for potential future extraction. ## Technical Context **Language/Version**: Go 1.25.1 + C bindings for WebKit2GTK **Primary Dependencies**: WebKit2GTK, GTK3, CGO for C bindings **Storage**: SQLite (maintain existing database schema and data) **Testing**: Go testing + WebKit integration tests **Target Platform**: Linux (Wayland/X11) - focus on GTK-based systems **Project Type**: single - native desktop application **Performance Goals**: <500ms startup time, <100MB baseline memory, maintain existing performance **Constraints**: Remove all Wails dependencies, preserve user data, maintain keyboard shortcuts and browser features **Scale/Scope**: Single browser window, existing CLI functionality, WebKit2GTK reference clone for development ## Constitution Check *GATE: Must pass before Phase 0 research. Re-check after Phase 1 design.* **Simplicity**: - Projects: 1 (single native browser application) - Using framework directly? ✅ (Direct WebKit2GTK, removing Wails wrapper) - Single data model? ✅ (Maintain existing SQLite schema) - Avoiding patterns? ✅ (Direct C bindings, no unnecessary abstraction layers) **Architecture**: - EVERY feature as library? ✅ (pkg/ package for WebKit bindings, reusable) - Libraries listed: pkg/webkit (WebKit2GTK Go bindings), existing internal packages - CLI per library: Maintain existing CLI, add webkit package testing commands - Library docs: llms.txt format planned for pkg/webkit **Testing (NON-NEGOTIABLE)**: - RED-GREEN-Refactor cycle enforced? ✅ (Contract tests for WebKit bindings first) - Git commits show tests before implementation? ✅ (Will create failing WebKit tests) - Order: Contract→Integration→E2E→Unit strictly followed? ✅ - Real dependencies used? ✅ (Real WebKit2GTK, actual browser engine) - Integration tests for: WebKit bindings, browser functionality, keyboard shortcuts - FORBIDDEN: Implementation before test, skipping RED phase **Observability**: - Structured logging included? ✅ (Continue using slog) - Frontend logs → backend? ✅ (WebKit console logs to Go backend) - Error context sufficient? ✅ (WebKit error propagation to Go) **Versioning**: - Version number assigned? Next version after current (maintain semver) - BUILD increments on every change? ✅ - Breaking changes handled? ✅ (Migration from Wails to native, preserve user data) ## Project Structure ### Documentation (this feature) ``` specs/[###-feature]/ ├── plan.md # This file (/plan command output) ├── research.md # Phase 0 output (/plan command) ├── data-model.md # Phase 1 output (/plan command) ├── quickstart.md # Phase 1 output (/plan command) ├── contracts/ # Phase 1 output (/plan command) └── tasks.md # Phase 2 output (/tasks command - NOT created by /plan) ``` ### Source Code (repository root) ``` # Option 1: Single project (DEFAULT) src/ ├── models/ ├── services/ ├── cli/ └── lib/ tests/ ├── contract/ ├── integration/ └── unit/ # Option 2: Web application (when "frontend" + "backend" detected) backend/ ├── src/ │ ├── models/ │ ├── services/ │ └── api/ └── tests/ frontend/ ├── src/ │ ├── components/ │ ├── pages/ │ └── services/ └── tests/ # Option 3: Mobile + API (when "iOS/Android" detected) api/ └── [same as backend above] ios/ or android/ └── [platform-specific structure] ``` **Structure Decision**: Option 1 (Single project) - Native desktop application with pkg/ for WebKit bindings ## Phase 0: Outline & Research 1. **Extract unknowns from Technical Context** above: - For each NEEDS CLARIFICATION → research task - For each dependency → best practices task - For each integration → patterns task 2. **Generate and dispatch research agents**: ``` For each unknown in Technical Context: Task: "Research {unknown} for {feature context}" For each technology choice: Task: "Find best practices for {tech} in {domain}" ``` 3. **Consolidate findings** in `research.md` using format: - Decision: [what was chosen] - Rationale: [why chosen] - Alternatives considered: [what else evaluated] **Output**: research.md with all NEEDS CLARIFICATION resolved ## Phase 1: Design & Contracts *Prerequisites: research.md complete* 1. **Extract entities from feature spec** → `data-model.md`: - Entity name, fields, relationships - Validation rules from requirements - State transitions if applicable 2. **Generate API contracts** from functional requirements: - For each user action → endpoint - Use standard REST/GraphQL patterns - Output OpenAPI/GraphQL schema to `/contracts/` 3. **Generate contract tests** from contracts: - One test file per endpoint - Assert request/response schemas - Tests must fail (no implementation yet) 4. **Extract test scenarios** from user stories: - Each story → integration test scenario - Quickstart test = story validation steps 5. **Update agent file incrementally** (O(1) operation): - Run `/scripts/update-agent-context.sh [claude|gemini|copilot]` for your AI assistant - If exists: Add only NEW tech from current plan - Preserve manual additions between markers - Update recent changes (keep last 3) - Keep under 150 lines for token efficiency - Output to repository root **Output**: data-model.md, /contracts/*, failing tests, quickstart.md, agent-specific file ## Phase 2: Task Planning Approach *This section describes what the /tasks command will do - DO NOT execute during /plan* **Task Generation Strategy**: - Load `/templates/tasks-template.md` as base - Generate tasks from WebKit bindings contract (webkit-bindings-api.yaml) - Create pkg/webkit package structure and CGO bridge tasks [P] - WebKit2GTK reference repository setup and analysis tasks - Contract tests for each WebKit API function [P] - Integration tests for browser features (navigation, zoom, shortcuts) - Migration tasks to remove Wails dependencies sequentially - Performance validation and data preservation verification tasks **Ordering Strategy**: - TDD order: Contract tests before WebKit bindings implementation - Dependency order: CGO bridge → WebKit API → Browser integration → Wails removal - Parallel tasks: Independent WebKit functions, separate test files [P] - Sequential migration: Preserve existing functionality throughout transition **Estimated Output**: 30-35 numbered, ordered tasks focusing on WebKit migration in tasks.md **IMPORTANT**: This phase is executed by the /tasks command, NOT by /plan ## Phase 3+: Future Implementation *These phases are beyond the scope of the /plan command* **Phase 3**: Task execution (/tasks command creates tasks.md) **Phase 4**: Implementation (execute tasks.md following constitutional principles) **Phase 5**: Validation (run tests, execute quickstart.md, performance validation) ## Complexity Tracking *Fill ONLY if Constitution Check has violations that must be justified* | Violation | Why Needed | Simpler Alternative Rejected Because | |-----------|------------|-------------------------------------| | [e.g., 4th project] | [current need] | [why 3 projects insufficient] | | [e.g., Repository pattern] | [specific problem] | [why direct DB access insufficient] | ## Progress Tracking *This checklist is updated during execution flow* **Phase Status**: - [x] Phase 0: Research complete (/plan command) - [x] Phase 1: Design complete (/plan command) - [x] Phase 2: Task planning complete (/plan command - describe approach only) - [ ] Phase 3: Tasks generated (/tasks command) - [ ] Phase 4: Implementation complete - [ ] Phase 5: Validation passed **Gate Status**: - [x] Initial Constitution Check: PASS - [x] Post-Design Constitution Check: PASS - [x] All NEEDS CLARIFICATION resolved - [x] Complexity deviations documented (none required) --- *Based on Constitution v2.1.1 - See `/memory/constitution.md`*