We should have Surkov's nice XUL work in 0.5 (bug 323850)

So, let's start adding "must have" stuff to this bug. I say that we should aim for a new release in a month's time...

added as blockers all the bug patches that have gone into the trunk since the last sync up.

I'd like to see the bug 323849 and bug 323851. I guess one month is more than enough to fix them.

Hopefully, 278449 (complex type schema validation) and its XForms counterpart, 329136 will be ready by end of this month. The code in the 2 already works well, however bug 308372 (a interface change) isn't on the branch and my code needs that.

(In reply to comment #5) > Hopefully, 278449 (complex type schema validation) and its XForms counterpart, > 329136 will be ready by end of this month. The code in the 2 already works > well, however bug 308372 (a interface change) isn't on the branch and my code > needs that. What do you mean? What will not work on the branch, and can we work around it?

(In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > Hopefully, 278449 (complex type schema validation) and its XForms counterpart, > > 329136 will be ready by end of this month. The code in the 2 already works > > well, however bug 308372 (a interface change) isn't on the branch and my code > > needs that. > > What do you mean? What will not work on the branch, and can we work around it? > Means it won't compile, the actual feature has to do with attribute qualification - can it be foo:bar or must it be bar? So there are 3 options: - work around the missing code by doing the checks manually, which will be slow (need to manually check the schema DOM). - not care about qualification, which is against spec but probably won't cause any issues for XForms. - create a Mozilla 1.8.x version of nsISchema and nsISchemaAttribute. third option is probably the best bet and I hope to get to it this week.

Aaron: Why did you make this depend on bug 312867?

(In reply to comment #8) > Aaron: Why did you make this depend on bug 312867? > Ack! Should have been 312687. I've now corrected it.

I doubt that I'll have time to fix bug 282828 for the 0.5 release, it might have to be pushed to 0.6 (bug 331209). But UIdep, complex schema val and XUL support is quite a party still!

added 300255. Patch for it is ready for the trunk when it reopens.

So for my part bug 282828 is waiting for review by Aaron, bug 305060 needs a sanity check from my side. I've also added bug 331961 to 0.5 as it is quite crucial to actually use requiredness (now that we also check it...). Then there is select+XUL work and schema stuff left. Will these two be done in a couple of days? If not, we have to decide whether to postpone the release or push them to 0.6. I argue for the latter. Besides that we have bug 329106, which we should push to 0.6 as well, as I believe that smaug is quite busy ftm.

(In reply to comment #12) > Then there is select+XUL work and schema stuff left. Will these two be done in > a couple of days? If not, we have to decide whether to postpone the release or > push them to 0.6. I argue for the latter. About select+XUL I hope that yes. At least patch is ready.

(In reply to comment #12) > So for my part bug 282828 is waiting for review by Aaron, bug 305060 needs a > sanity check from my side. > > I've also added bug 331961 to 0.5 as it is quite crucial to actually use > requiredness (now that we also check it...). I take the silence as a yes.

(In reply to comment #14) > (In reply to comment #12) > > So for my part bug 282828 is waiting for review by Aaron, bug 305060 needs a > > sanity check from my side. > > > > I've also added bug 331961 to 0.5 as it is quite crucial to actually use > > requiredness (now that we also check it...). > > I take the silence as a yes. > argh, to the removing of bug 329106, that is.