On Fri Apr 20 2018 22:14:04 GMT-0400 (Eastern Standard Time), John R.
Sweet wrote:
> This conflict between "modern javascript" and legacy extensions --
> or whatever the heck is going on -- is a really bad situation. We
> need a couple of extensions that won't work past v
gt; >> From: Enterprise [mailto:enterprise-boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of
> >> Perry Wagle
> >> Sent: April 18, 2018 12:49 PM
> >> To: Enterprise@mozilla.org
> >> Subject: [Mozilla Enterprise] ESR52 vs "modern" javascript
> >>
> >&
ool District
> >
> >
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Enterprise [mailto:enterprise-boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf
> >> Of Perry Wagle
> >> Sent: April 18, 2018 12:49 PM
> >> To: Enterprise@mozilla.org
> &g
ict
-Original Message-
From: Enterprise [mailto:enterprise-boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of
Perry Wagle
Sent: April 18, 2018 12:49 PM
To: Enterprise@mozilla.org
Subject: [Mozilla Enterprise] ESR52 vs "modern" javascript
ESR52 produces blank pages when more and more sites appar
ailto:enterprise-boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of
>> Perry Wagle
>> Sent: April 18, 2018 12:49 PM
>> To: Enterprise@mozilla.org
>> Subject: [Mozilla Enterprise] ESR52 vs "modern" javascript
>>
>> ESR52 produces blank pages when more and more sites apparen
n
Computer Systems Technician
North Vancouver School District
> -Original Message-
> From: Enterprise [mailto:enterprise-boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of
> Perry Wagle
> Sent: April 18, 2018 12:49 PM
> To: Enterprise@mozilla.org
> Subject: [Mozilla Enterprise] ESR52 vs &q
ESR52 produces blank pages when more and more sites apparently try to render
things with what must be “modern” javascript.
Is there any hope of a workaround? My legacy extension that I critically
require runs only on ESR52, and porting it is still quite a trick.
Thanks!
— Perry
7 matches
Mail list logo