If there would be a reduced risk by scoping the feature to debug builds I would agree with you that it should be scoped. But Ryan suggests there isn't. My much less informed opinion tends to agree with him.
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Falcon Darkstar Momot < fal...@iridiumlinux.org> wrote: > > why those people cannot run their > browser with a debug build, since they are developing. > I do want to point out that there is considerable value in the current arrangement - "developing" turns out to have layers. I'm a core firefox developer - Nick and I write the http/2 code and indeed we generally do it with debug builds. So its not relevant to my day to day coding. But a huge part of protocol development happens in the next layer - interop testing between different servers and on networks with different gear than is covered by the initial tests. That just takes lots of diversity and some time. The tail of this pretty much goes on forever - its not just new protocols. When a problem shows up on bugzilla a pcap is often the sensible course of action. These bug reporters are part of development too - hopefully they're running pre-release channels but sometimes they are not. They "dogfood" the product day to day and can't be using debug builds for that because its just too slow. Asking them to download a debug build to file a bug report will often result in no bug report. So that's the value of the current setup on the client side - it increases the debugability of the product. That's a big deal. -P -- dev-tech-crypto mailing list dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
