On 2014-04-17, 1:31 PM, Bobby Holley wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com <mailto:ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com>> wrote:What would be your opinion on the interim use of ifdef (or moz.build equivalent) to prevent some or all of those files from being built on browser builds? I think this is the right thing to do. We still want this code to die though, right? Doing an #ifdef for the interim sounds reasonable, but Henri's original post suggests that there isn't much will on the c-c side to push this over the line as long as things still work. Henri's offer to write all the C++ patches for c-c and then nuke the code seems like a pretty good compromise, unless the manifest and automation work is expected to take a long time. Is it?
From a puristic point of view, I do want to have 0 dead code in m-c. From a pragmatic standpoint here, however, given the constraints, and the very little added value that this work will bring for Thunderbird developers (disregarding the "ultimatim"!) I think it's not worth Henri's time to pursue doing the right thing further. This won't be the first place where we have code specifically to support c-c, and I think that's OK. Whenever the Thunderbird developers get the time to work on moving this code, we should offer our assistance and appreciation. But until then, we can have our cake and eat it too.
Cheers, Ehsan _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
