XULRunner - will be or won't be?

[Jesse Keating]

On Thursday 28 June 2007 11:43:24 Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> Personally I disagree with you about xulrunner. Several application
> packages which currently depend on libraries inside firefox are going
> to be positively impacted by the inclusion of xulrunner.  Enough of
> them to make xulrunner a big enough deal to make a little fuss over in
> the next fedora release from an end-user perspective.

This is also another case where Fedora may be the first to "incur the pain" of 
reworking our software for Xulrunner, and identifying things that need to be 
change, potentially upstream.  We need to be more proactive about touting 
these things where we break ground and other distros just follow us through.  
We often are the suckers who take all the pain and punishment, the other 
distros just follow us through and say "look at how much better ours is!"

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20070628/ca1b9621/attachment.sig>