| 1 |
> Can phantomjs be simply masked for a longer period until the development |
| 2 |
> world has had an opportunity to catch up? |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Just exactly what I thought. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Although, in-tree version is obsolete anyway, and upstream made few next |
| 7 |
releases with brain-exploding buildsystem, so I just pushed 9999 version to my |
| 8 |
"public sandbox" overlay, and happy with it on the projects that depends on |
| 9 |
phantomjs. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
By the way, headless chrome, well, work a bit different in comparsion with |
| 12 |
"analogs" (including wkhtmlto{img,pdf}), so, it needs much more time than a |
| 13 |
month to get full analogs. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
So, I'm disagree with monthly dropping in this context too (well, I disagree |
| 16 |
with the idea. As I just said, I by myself is in safe from being affected by |
| 17 |
it). |
Archives