[jbosstools-dev] Moving to XulRunner 1.9

[Maksim Areshkau]

Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
> 
>>>> 1.9
>>>> and will not work with older versions.
>>>> See here http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/atf-dev/msg00600.html
>>>>
>>>> Is it time for us to move on XR1.9?
>>>>    
>>>>       
>>> do we have a way to fix the missing features in XR1.9 ?
>>> I recall last time that drag'n'drop and selection were affected ?
>>>     
>> DnD has been working normaly, as i remember.
>> Selection has been affected only on
>> OSX(https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=368608) and workaround
>> exists.
>>   
> What is that workaround ? I couldn't spot it in the comments.
>>> What does ATF do ?
>>>     
>> What does it mean, is it about which functionality have atf?
>>   
> They also depend on similar features of xulrunner that we do - if they
> already fixed some thing we can reuse if
> it makes sense or if they fixed it bad not how to do it.
> 
> Anyhow, I went back through the archives and found the following issues
> to be what we have discussed before:
> 
> 1) The Selection area as described above. If that only affects Mac and
> there is a maintainable workaround that should be fine.
>
There will be the similar scheme to which we use for drowning resizes
elements now.
> 2) Platform availability - can we get or produce a xulrunner 1.9 binary
> for all our supported platforms ? x86_64 bit ? Mac Cocoa/Carbon 
>
Mozilla provide support for following platforms linux x86,win32, Mac
i386(I have cheeked work only on carbon, i haven't checked it on cocoa).
For other platforms(linux x64 and windows x64 we can build XR1.9, it's
much ease than build XR1.8.
Also there exists an bug on win x64, that user can't select more then
677MB of memory when run eclipse x32 and java x32.You can see this
thread(http://www.java-forum.org/ides-und-tools/85846-eclipse-maximal-xmx696m-hoeher-geht-nicht.html)
So build of xulrunner for this platform is important.
> 3) Updatability - will users (of both jboss tools and JBDS) be able to
> update to xulrunner 1.9 via our updatesite  without conflicts to the SWT
> integration/hook/hack ?
It should work without any problems.
> 
> If we can solve/verify these or at least find acceptable workarounds and
> there isn't any other known problems then lets move to XulRunner 1.9
> after M3 have been released.
> 
> /max


-- 
Maksim Areshkau