On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 11:37, Robert Newson <[email protected]> wrote:
> 1.1.1 contains many important fixes, holding it up to get 1.8.5 > support in seems odd to me. The breakage also seems dramatic for a bug > fix release and there was wide agreement on that point. > > Putting all of that aside, what should we do? Make it configurable at > build time? Introduce all this breakage in 1.1.1 and slap a big > warning on it? > It's already configurable at build time via --with-js-*.... And again, I don't think there was a problem with any official release, just some not official version some distros yanked out of a xulrunner tarball. If you must keep the support reverted, do so. I'll say I'm -0 on it. Just a bit of a bummer. > > I'm still voting for the current state of 1.1.x, which doesn't include > 1.8.5 support or the paren change. > > B. > > On 6 October 2011 19:34, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 6 Oct 2011, at 19:31, Paul Davis wrote: > > > >> That was awfully quick. :/ > > > > Agreed. > > > >> I would prefer to make this a social > >> contract by doing something along the lines of requiring people to run > >> ./configure --yes-really-give-me-1.8.5 > > > > -1 > > > > >
