Colin Guthrie wrote:
> Tomasz Paweł Gajc wrote:
>> Dnia 2008-07-04, o godz. 18:06:53
>> Huh ? xulrunner ?
>>
>> IIRC there were signs that mdv will only provide firefox from upstream
>> tarball and xulrunner is not supported upstream etc.Looks like this has
>> changed, imo for good.
>
> IIRC, (and I could be *very* wrong here!) I think Fred C mentioned
> that as Fedora were doing this (xulrunner) we were basically going to
> copy it!
>
> I think it was in the 2009 specs released recently in pdf format...
>
> So I think the xulrunner route is the correct way to go. Put xul
> runner in main and then put firefox[3] in main. Firefox2 will slowly
> die as the remaining packages that need it are compiled against
> xulrunner, and can then be moved to contrib.
>
> I think that's the plan and the sooner it's done the better for QA and
> 2009 :)
>
> (please correct me if I'm way of base here but this is how I remember
> things)
>
> Col
>
That's the idea. Moving things slowly to xulrunner.
I personally believe that using xulrunner will not help to decrease the
amount of packages that needs to be rebuilt every time a security hole
is discovered, since most part of the source code and specially the core
is in xulrunner.
By the way, I also think xulrunner is the way to go, as we can drop the
current firefox libification (which is ugly, but needed), and if we give
up the xulrunner way for some reason, we can easily (I hope) go back the
libification mode.
Does it sound right or am I missing something?

Thanks