Bug 1562315 Comment 7 Edit History

Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.

Original comment by
on 
(In reply to Nhi Nguyen (:nhi) from comment #6)
> This should not be uplifted to 68, as it caused a regression and is being backed out of 69 (see bug 1563803)

No, this is going to be backed in bug 1562315.  I will then reopen this (with a reference to b-o cset) and leave open.  This doesn't block MVP any longer (was not able to repro after whole afternoon of testing.)
Revision 1 by
on 
(In reply to Nhi Nguyen (:nhi) from comment #6)
> This should not be uplifted to 68, as it caused a regression and is being backed out of 69 (see bug 1563803)

No, this is going to be backed out in bug 1562315.  I will then reopen this (with a reference to b-o cset) and leave open.  This doesn't block MVP any longer (was not able to repro after whole afternoon of testing.)
Revision 2 by
on 
(In reply to Nhi Nguyen (:nhi) from comment #6)
> This should not be uplifted to 68, as it caused a regression and is being backed out of 69 (see bug 1563803)

No, this is going to be backed out in bug 1563803.  I will then reopen this (with a reference to b-o cset) and leave open.  This doesn't block MVP any longer (was not able to repro after whole afternoon of testing.)
Revision 3 by
on 
(In reply to Nhi Nguyen (:nhi) from comment #6)
> This should not be uplifted to 68, as it caused a regression and is being backed out of 69 (see bug 1563803)

Yes, this is going to be backed out in bug 1563803.  I will then reopen this (with a reference to b-o cset) and leave open.  This doesn't block MVP any longer (was not able to repro after whole afternoon of testing.)

Back to Bug 1562315 Comment 7