Subject: Re: [bug#67512] [PATCH v4 3/4] gnu: Add wasm packages.

From: Ian Eure <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 18:18:03 -0800

Clément Lassieur <[email-masked]> writes:

>> Are you saying you want a process like:
>>
>> 1a. Get wasm toolchain stuff merged.
>> 1b. Get Librewolf merged without WASM sandboxing.
>> 2. Update icecat, torbrowser, mullvad, and librewolf to use 
>> WASM sandboxing.
>
> Excatly.  1b can be done after 1a, or before 1a.
>

Is there a technical reason why landing WASM sandboxing support 
for all browsers in the same patch is desirable?  I can intuit 
none, and as I’m disinclined to either roll back portions of my 
existing patchset, or work on other browsers, the proposal is 
disagreeable.

I’m fine with splitting off the WASM toolchain stuff into a 
separate patch, and then merging LibreWolf afterwards.  If others 
would like to add WASM sandboxing to their Firefox-derived 
browsers afterwards, they are, of course, welcome to.

Is there further guidance on where the WASM toolchain packages 
should be placed?  It seemed there was objection to having them in 
(gnu packages wasm), but nobody has proposed an alternate location 
or engaged with the options I presented.

Thanks,

  — Ian