Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Using Services.jsm #6

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

Using Services.jsm #6

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

erikvold
Copy link

No description provided.

@whimboo
Copy link
Contributor

whimboo commented Mar 1, 2012

I'm about to clean-up old pull requests now. So thanks for the patch Erik! The patch looks good but there is one more change you will have to make. Our minVersion for each application is still 3.6 (mozilla-1.9.2). Given that Services.jsm has been introduced with mozilla-2.0 we have to bump the minVersion entries. I would propose to use 4.0.

@xabolcs
Copy link
Collaborator

xabolcs commented Mar 1, 2012

Please don't drop gecko 1.9.x support!
Some times ago there were commits to reintroduce the support of gecko 1.9.x: ea737c6, 5afd1bb

If Services.jsm is needed, then it could be borrowed from mxr! See http://mike.kaply.com/2011/02/08/adding-services-to-your-firefox-add-on/

@whimboo
Copy link
Contributor

whimboo commented Mar 1, 2012

Well, we can at least wait until we officially have no longer nightly builds on mozilla-1.9.2. Mozilla will discontinue support for Firefox 3.6 in April. So I don't think it's worth to still supporting Firefox 3.6 at this stage any longer. Users of the extension could install an older version of it if it's really necessary.

@xabolcs
Copy link
Collaborator

xabolcs commented Mar 1, 2012

Latest Songbird nightly is still gecko 1.9.x based. Would You like drop Songbird support too?

A wrapper module would be acceptable after these commits, to support old gecko again?

@whimboo
Copy link
Contributor

whimboo commented Mar 2, 2012

Someone should get in contact with the Songbird developers and ask them what's the process to get xulrunner upgraded to a more recent version. Probably they were waiting for the first ESR release? Would you mind doing it?

@xabolcs
Copy link
Collaborator

xabolcs commented Mar 2, 2012

I'd prefer to write that wrapper module rather than contacting them, at first sight. :)

@erikvold
Copy link
Author

erikvold commented Mar 2, 2012

can we just pull a copy of Services.jsm in to the repo until we can remove it?

@whimboo
Copy link
Contributor

whimboo commented Mar 5, 2012

Erik, sounds like a good proposal. How many different files in the repository would benefit from it? If it's worth we should add it and update any Cc/Cc call to use the available entry from Services.jsm instead. Could make our code way cleaner.

@whimboo
Copy link
Contributor

whimboo commented Mar 14, 2012

I think that this can wait until 3.2.3.

@whimboo
Copy link
Contributor

whimboo commented May 2, 2012

Moving to 3.4 because it's not that necessary to get out to our user base.

@xabolcs
Copy link
Collaborator

xabolcs commented Mar 13, 2013

Clearing milestone 3.5.

@xabolcs
Copy link
Collaborator

xabolcs commented Oct 11, 2017

With the WebExtension API rewrite this is now fixed. 👍

@xabolcs xabolcs closed this Oct 11, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants