On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 23:06 +1200, Kent Fredric wrote:
> 
> Can phantomjs be simply masked for a longer period until the
> development
> world has had an opportunity to catch up?

What kind of timeframe do you propose?

> 1.5 Months from "We're not working on this" to "its dead jim, kill it
> from orbit"
> is a bit fast for anything entrenched.

The problems were there a lot longer so for me at least it still feels
slow. The fact that Chromium is now an alternative finally made it
easier to mask this, but really we should have masked this months ago.
If not for security reasons than for all the QA violations such as tons
of bundled code.

> Chromium 59 is also, similarly, quite new.

It has hit stable upstream so we should see stable versions in Gentoo
soon, I expect.

Hans