From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C71DD139694 for ; Tue, 6 Jun 2017 05:28:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B3BBD224002; Tue, 6 Jun 2017 05:28:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63E1421C060 for ; Tue, 6 Jun 2017 05:28:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:2001:980:4ed9:1:beae:c5ff:fe48:18dc] (unknown [IPv6:2001:980:4ed9:1:beae:c5ff:fe48:18dc]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: graaff) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A464F341752 for ; Tue, 6 Jun 2017 05:28:04 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1496726880.31590.1.camel@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: www-client/phantomjs and dev-ruby/poltergeist From: Hans de Graaff To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2017 07:28:00 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20170605230605.099dfdc3@katipo2.lan> References: <1496646687.9038.9.camel@gentoo.org> <20170605230605.099dfdc3@katipo2.lan> Organization: Gentoo Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-/Y5DL9ASTtAIbWhLKolr" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Archives-Salt: e67902ce-e2cc-44f4-8e00-dce01ad0cd69 X-Archives-Hash: d6ebb99b40290a46517f01a990858222 --=-/Y5DL9ASTtAIbWhLKolr Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 23:06 +1200, Kent Fredric wrote: >=20 > 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 --=-/Y5DL9ASTtAIbWhLKolr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABEIAB0WIQSx3yP+V82AqODatGmIg/pWowio1wUCWTY9YAAKCRCIg/pWowio 10vgAP4+wuUHgxXz8Yvjr4p5SPG03+BhMGgHooYx9x6CCMUuFgD/REdx6ttZIlO0 gjM4i81EQ4TKIFLTeHHOYrLFf+D2xos= =tXXP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-/Y5DL9ASTtAIbWhLKolr--