(In reply to Pascal Chevrel:pascalc from comment #7) > Lee, this bug already created 6 regressions since its landing, instead of uplifting all the fixes from 90, should we back this bug out in 89 beta as this was an S4? 2 were already resolved with fixes in 89, and 1 was a dup. This patch also helps fix a bug that was pre-existing before 89. That just leaves 3 uplifts to fix some regressions related to 3D transforms corner-cases. I think I would rather uplift those 3 fixes to 89.
Bug 1682195 Comment 8 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
(In reply to Pascal Chevrel:pascalc from comment #7) > Lee, this bug already created 6 regressions since its landing, instead of uplifting all the fixes from 90, should we back this bug out in 89 beta as this was an S4? 2 were already resolved with fixes in 89, and 1 was a dup. This patch also helps fix a bug that was pre-existing before 89. That just leaves 3 uplifts to fix some regressions related to 3D transforms corner-cases. I think I would rather uplift those 3 fixes to 89. I've requested the uplifts early enough in the beta cycle, and given that we are having an extended beta, I think I will comfortably be able to deal with any remaining unforeseen issues.