[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: xulrunner feature (was Re: Fedora 9 Feature Status)



Alex Lancaster said the following on 01/04/2008 12:52 AM Pacific Time:
"TM" == Till Maas  writes:

[...]

Nope.  It hasn't been updated since August 2007 doesn't follow the
current feature template.

TM> The last update was 2007-11-12 according to
TM> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureEncryptedFilesystems?action=info

TM> Only the date written on the page itself was not updated. Afaik
TM> this feature is already available in rawhide btw.

It's similar with xulrunner (updated 2007-12-31):

Different issues.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureXULRunner

It appears to have been removed as a Fedora 9 feature, but the feature

This is not true. It was never part of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/9/FeatureList

is already in rawhide.  One missing item that doesn't conform to the
template is that there doesn't appear to be a contingency plan, but it

You are correct. FESCo often asks what the contingency plan is when reviewing features for acceptance. This particular feature was in CategoryProposedFedora9--meaning that it was being put forth for a FESCo vote. I sent mail to the feature owner directly and posted status here a couple weeks ago. Receiving no respose I moved it to CategoryProposedFeature.

would be very difficult to back out the feature now as many packages
have been rebuilt against xulrunner already and the old firefox-devel
package has been removed.


Nobody is calling for this :)

John


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]