Release 3.10 #239
Release 3.10 #239
Conversation
History.md
Outdated
| @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@ | |||
| 3.10 / 2017-05-16 | |||
| ================== | |||
| * Update maxVersions of applications in install.rdf (#310) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not Issue #310 (, but #237?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ups, not sure why the release version made it as issue #. Thanks for noticing.
extension/install.rdf
Outdated
| <em:id>{3550f703-e582-4d05-9a08-453d09bdfdc6}</em:id> | ||
| <em:minVersion>39.0</em:minVersion> | ||
| <em:maxVersion>52.0</em:maxVersion> | ||
| <em:maxVersion>59.0</em:maxVersion> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
59.0 is too much. 56.0 or * is the currently acceptable maxVersion for Firefox Thunderbird on AMO.
We shouldn't pass 56.0 anyway!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, right. That's definitely true. Totally missed that with 57.0 the current extension won't work anymore.
extension/install.rdf
Outdated
| <em:id>toolkit@mozilla.org</em:id> | ||
| <em:minVersion>39.0</em:minVersion> | ||
| <em:maxVersion>52.0</em:maxVersion> | ||
| <em:maxVersion>59.0</em:maxVersion> |
extension/install.rdf
Outdated
| <em:id>{ec8030f7-c20a-464f-9b0e-13a3a9e97384}</em:id> | ||
| <em:minVersion>39.0</em:minVersion> | ||
| <em:maxVersion>52.0</em:maxVersion> | ||
| <em:maxVersion>59.0</em:maxVersion> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same here for Firefox, let it to be 56.0!
| <em:id>{92650c4d-4b8e-4d2a-b7eb-24ecf4f6b63a}</em:id> | ||
| <em:minVersion>2.38</em:minVersion> | ||
| <em:maxVersion>2.49</em:maxVersion> | ||
| <em:maxVersion>2.53</em:maxVersion> |
|
Application versions on AMO, for reference. |
|
Should be all done now. |
|
Looks good to me now! 👍 |
| * Revert separator for extensions to new line (#230) | ||
| * Mark extension as multi-process compatible (#228) | ||
| * Update ja and ja-JP-mac translation (#233) | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This list should be updated once #240 got merged!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We don't have to given that we reference the issue and not the actual PR. So all is still fine.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, I will do to have the correct commit message presented there.
|
PR has been updated for the wording of issue #230. |
|
Looks good to me now! 👍 |
2 participants
This PR fixes issue #238. I will still have to wait for PR #237 landed first before merging it.
@xabolcs, can you please have a look?