Firefox 1.0.x sunset announcement and Breezy

[James "Doc" Livingston]

On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 01:02 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 April 2006 03:06, Alexander Jacob Tsykin wrote:
> > Second, you are missing something obvious. All 
> > applications which depend on firefox would have to be recompiled if
> > firefox were to be upgraded to 1.5. Also all packages which depend
> > on any other package compiled from the firefox source code. This is
> > a massive endeavour.
> 
> Actually it's not such a big deal to recompile like that. These things 
> are easily automatable. The lead developer commits a new Firefox to 
> the server farm, come back tomorrow and every package has been 
> recompiled and could even be on the web servers ready for download. 
> Make that all packages on all supported architectures. (Assuming 
> Ubuntu uses a server farm system, there's no reason to suppose they 
> don't)

Assuming that the shipped version of the other application supports
building against the newer Firefox.

If it doesn't, support would either need to be backported (non-trivial
in some cases) or the application updated to a newer version (which may
require newer versions of other stuff). The latter would get messy
*very* quickly, if for example the version of Epiphany supporting the
new Firefox require newer Gnome libraries.


Cheers,

James "Doc" Livingston
-- 
"Trailing comma not permitted in enum definition. (This time I'm letting
you off with a warning)" -- MPW C error message