On Thursday, May 23, 2013 11:11:22 PM UTC+2, Alex Epshteyn wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for chiming in and providing the extra info. Good to know.
I'd like to ask, however, the reasons for planning to remove support for
IE6/7/8? Why would we do that? It's already there and doesn't require
There are many other browsers available on Windows XP, and you should tell
your dad that by continuing using an unsupported browser, his computer is
at risk.
See also
http://www.troyhunt.com/2013/01/the-impending-crisis-that-is-windows-xp.html
Hehe, I like the IE7 tax idea mentioned on
On Wednesday, May 22, 2013 11:53:47 PM UTC+2, Alex Epshteyn wrote:
Thanks for your comment. Let me respond to your points:
1) I've seen this point discussed before, and the standard
counter-argument is that the spirit of OSS is free as in freedom, not
beer. Lots of developers get paid
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for chiming in and providing the extra info. Good to know.
I'd like to ask, however, the reasons for planning to remove support for
IE6/7/8? Why would we do that? It's already there and doesn't require too
much maintenance.
As of today, nearly 8% of my site's visitors are
I agree on do not remove IE7 and IE8. A lot of user still using them.
2013/5/23 Alex Epshteyn alexander.epsht...@gmail.com
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for chiming in and providing the extra info. Good to know.
I'd like to ask, however, the reasons for planning to remove support for
IE6/7/8? Why
I'd like to ask, however, the reasons for planning to remove support for
IE6/7/8? Why would we do that?
To simplify the code base and moving on (HTML 5) I would say.
JQuery for example already did that transition. JQuery 2.0 does not support
IE6-8 anymore but they still maintain
Fair enough, but I'm curious to know why leaving the code that supports
legacy browsers would interfere with implementing new features. For
example, if you want to implement a new widget called XPanel, it think it's
perfectly fine to say that this widget doesn't support IE6/7/8, and leave
it up
Do you have a specific example? I'm curious.
Existing widgets should also work great on mobile devices, its not just
about writing new widgets.
Its also not just about widgets in general. For example there is currently
an issue in GWT-RPC where only IE9 has a memory leak because GWT-RPC
One of the big problems with deployed GWT apps has always been the
impossibility of tracing JavaScript exceptions back to the Java source
code. What we need is a true equivalent of Java stack traces.
There was an effort made by the GWT team a couple years ago to solve
this problem (
I dont think you will get paid for it, because:
1.) Its somewhat not in the spirit of open source software
2.) Your patch must go through review and there is no guarantee that it
will be committed
3.) GWT will remove IE6/7 support soon and probably in 2014 also IE8
support. Also Opera moves to
Thanks for your comment. Let me respond to your points:
1) I've seen this point discussed before, and the standard counter-argument
is that the spirit of OSS is free as in freedom, not beer. Lots of
developers get paid to work on OSS projects.
2) This is actually one of the reasons I'm
Correction: when I said that a browser needs to support sourcemaps to
generate accurate stack traces, that wasn't entirely accurate. What a
browser needs to support is the stack property of exception objects,
which provides a JavaScript stack trace with both line and column numbers.
It's the GWT
12 matches
Mail list logo
