I'm also +1 for removal. We've been planning for it since 3.0; may as well pull 
off that band-aid. Those not ready will have extended 3.1 support while the 
foolhardy (Hi!) can take the ship out to see and see what leaks. If it's not 
100% acceptable for everyone at 3.2.0, hopefully 3.2.2 or thereabouts will be 
good enough without having to drag a mummified XUL all the way to 3.3.

Jason

--
Jason Boyer
MIS Supervisor
Indiana State Library
http://library.in.gov/

From: Open-ils-dev [mailto:open-ils-dev-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On 
Behalf Of Bill Erickson
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 11:57 AM
To: Public Open-ILS tech discussion <OPEN-ILS-DEV@list.georgialibraries.org>
Subject: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Informal vote to apply XUL-removal patch to 3.2

**** This is an EXTERNAL email. Exercise caution. DO NOT open attachments or 
click links from unknown senders or unexpected email. ****
________________________________
Devs,

I'd like to have an informal vote on whether we should remove (well, disable) 
the XUL client in 3.2.  Delaying the decision is complicating the release 
process.  If it's clear which way the wind is blowing, we can set a date for 
the final vote and patching.

Knowing what you know today about outstanding webstaff blockers (a few were 
just added), would you vote to proceed with XUL removal?  Can I get a show of 
hands, yea or nay?

Thanks,

-b

Reply via email to