On 11/15/2007 09:56 AM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Nov 14, 2007 2:41 PM, Christopher Aillon <caillon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Um, did you read the article? Specifically the "What are we doing?"
opening text and the third bullet point underneath it?
firefox as shipped in Fedora, isn't what I'm most concerned about.
I'm pretty confident that for firefox in Fedora has a roadmap on how
handle the maintenance burden of a firefox package that diverges from
upstream development over the course of a Fedora release cycle.
What I am really concerned about is the other gecko lib based
applications we have. xulrunner is a clear win for these applications
but only if the upstream developers for these applications are ready
to make use of xulrunner. We've been talking about xulrunner since F8
testing started. I would have hoped that the maintainers for
applications that depend on gecko-libs would know by now if the
upstream projects are ready to support xulrunner.
Most of them ought to be using gtkmozembed which should not be that
affected by the xulrunner changes too much.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
