Re: Minimum Required Python Version

On 9/10/2012 2:35 PM, Dave Mandelin wrote: On Sunday, September 9, 2012 12:54:29 PM UTC-7, Gregory Szorc wrote: So, 2.6 or 2.7? Thanks for bringing this up! Count me as another vote for 2.7. I don't like using obsolete language versions outside of necessity, and I've never found it

Re: try: -p all considered harmful?

FWIW, I'm torn on this topic as a sheriff who has often had to wade through the fallout of poorly-tested patches (I've landed a few myself too!). It can be a massive pain when we're in periods of heavy load with a lot of coalescing going on. It can lead to very long periods of tree closure

Re: The future of PGO on Windows

On 2/4/2013 9:59 PM, Dave Mandelin wrote: I was talking to Taras and Naveed about this today, and what also came up was: 4. Do the work to make 64-bit JS jit perf as good as 32-bit JS jit perf, and then switch to x64 builds for Windows. There are of course many issues involved with such a

Re: What does BC stand for?

On 2/26/2013 5:39 AM, allencb...@gmail.com wrote: In arewefastyet.com (which is the website for posting the latest Mozilla Javascript performance), there's a new branch of js called (BC + Ion + TI) in addition to (JM + TI + Ion).I suppose JM stands for JaegerMonkey, TI stands for

Re: Windows 7 Platform Update June 2010 SDK

On 2/27/2013 8:33 AM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: Hi all, just a heads up: the Windows 7 platform update that's being shipped today has the following KB article: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2670838?wa=wsignin1.0 Interesting part: If you are a Windows 7 DirectX developer who uses the June

Re: What does BC stand for?

On 3/1/2013 10:18 PM, allencb...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a binary for download? Nightlies are available from the link below. http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/ You want a build from the directories with ionmonkey in them. Use at your own risk, of course.

Re: What does BC stand for?

On 3/8/2013 9:02 PM, allencb...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks. Is there a build for XULrunner? No, you'd have to roll your own. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: What does BC stand for?

On 3/14/2013 7:14 PM, allencb...@gmail.com wrote: Any idea what the tentative timeframe of rolling this out? in firefox 23 ? The goal is Firefox 23, yes. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org

Re: TBPL job visibility policy - now documented

On 3/26/2013 12:07 PM, Dave Townsend wrote: This is awesome, thanks for writing this up, it's made me spot one more place where Jetpack is failing. Can we get some more definition around Runs on all trees that merge into mozilla-central? In particular I want to make that true for Jetpack but I

Replacing gcc 4.5 as the default Linux compiler?

For 4 months now, we've been dealing with intermittent segfaults in gcc during compilation, most often in IonBuilder.cpp. We've been tracking these failures in bug 820796. Given that this is pointing to a compiler bug, it seems unlikely that we're going to get much traction with fixing this on

Re: Replacing gcc 4.5 as the default Linux compiler?

On 4/1/2013 12:06 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: gcc 4.7.2 was installed on builders last week. Unfortunately, it comes with its own set of problems. See bugs 854085, 854103 and 854105. The worst part (which is unfiled at the moment) is that PGO builds OOM on x86. That might require switching to

Re: Replacing gcc 4.5 as the default Linux compiler?

On 4/1/2013 1:09 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: We're on 4.5.2, we could try 4.5.4. Please file a releng bug to have it built and deployed, but not replacing 4.5.2, we'll have to check it breaks nothing first. (and please Cc me) Mike Filed bug 856763. ___

Re: What does BC stand for?

On 4/8/2013 10:28 PM, allencb...@gmail.com wrote: Am I right to assume that the XULrunner 23 daily build includes BC? Yes ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Improving Mac OS X 10.6 test wait times by reducing 10.7 load

On 4/26/2013 11:11 AM, Justin Lebar wrote: So what we're saying is that we are going to completely reverse our previous tree management policy? Basically, yes. Although, due to coalescing, do you always have a full run of tests on the tip of m-i before merging to m-c? Yes. Note that we

Re: Storage in Gecko

On 4/26/2013 3:07 PM, Justin Lebar wrote: The current level of flakiness in the IndexedDB test suite (especially on OSX) makes me concerned about what to expect if it starts getting heavier use across the various platforms. Is that just in the OOP tests, or everywhere? Mostly IPC.

Proposal for an inbound2 branch

As has been discussed at length in the various infrastructure meetings, one common point of frustration for developers is frequent tree closures due to bustage on inbound. While there are other issues and ideas for how to improve the inbound bustage situation, one problem I'm seeing is that

Re: Proposal for an inbound2 branch

On 4/30/2013 11:19 AM, Chris AtLee wrote: It seems like a tree used by a smaller, more focused group of people could cope better with leaving some orange on the tree for short periods of time. Instead of backing out suspect revisions, and closing the tree to wait for the results of the backout

Follow-up: Using an inbound2 branch as a hot spare for mozilla-inbound

It seems from the previous thread on this topic that there is enough support for the idea to at least proceed with a trial to see how an inbound2 would function in practice. For this reason, RelEng will be configuring the cypress project branch for this purpose and we will begin using it per

Re: MozillaBuild 1.7 Release

On 5/9/2013 11:15 AM, Kyle Huey wrote: I am pleased to announce that (thanks to work by Ted) MozillaBuild 1.7 is available at http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mozilla/libraries/win32/MozillaBuildSetup-Latest.exe This release contains: - Support for the 8.0 SDK with MSVC 2010 - Mercurial

Re: [Sheriffs] Closure of trunk trees - owners for bugs needed

Since the concern has already been raised on IRC a few times about the likelihood of bustage pileups once the tree re-opens, I would also like to also throw out a quick reminder that Try wait times are probably the lowest they will ever be during a regular week because of this closure, so

Re: Improving Mac OS X 10.6 test wait times by reducing 10.7 load

On 10/29/2013 4:31 PM, Armen Zambrano G. wrote: In order to improve our wait times, I propose that we stop testing on tbpl per-checkin [2] on OS X 10.7 and re-purpose the 10.7 machines as 10.6 to increase our capacity. Please let us know if this plan is unacceptable and needs further

Re: Pushes to Backouts on Mozilla Inbound

On 11/6/2013 10:57 AM, James Graham wrote: It could be a win if the results are misleading infrequently enough compared to the time savings that the expectation time for getting a patch to stick on m-c decreases. That depends on the P(result is different between try and clobber) and the time

Re: Reacting more strongly to low-memory situations in Firefox 25

On 11/25/2013 12:02 PM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote: Because one of the long-term possibilities discussed for solving this issue is releasing a 64-bit version of Firefox, I additionally broke down the OOM crashes into users running a 32-bit version of Windows and users running a 64-bit version of

Re: Reacting more strongly to low-memory situations in Firefox 25

On 11/25/2013 12:02 PM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote: Because one of the long-term possibilities discussed for solving this issue is releasing a 64-bit version of Firefox, I additionally broke down the OOM crashes into users running a 32-bit version of Windows and users running a 64-bit version of

Re: Reacting more strongly to low-memory situations in Firefox 25

On 11/25/2013 1:26 PM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote: This is an analysis of the crash reports from a particular day, so it's almost all going to be 32-bit Firefox because that's the only thing we release. 64-bit Firefox Nightly crashes due to OOM would be lumped into the OOM-win64 bucket in the

MozillaBuild 1.9.0 test build up

I just uploaded a test build of MozillaBuild 1.9.0. Please try it out and provide feedback, especially with mozmake. http://people.mozilla.org/~rvandermeulen/MozillaBuildSetup1.9.0pre.exe Notable changes in this build: * Better support for newer MSVC and Windows SDK versions * Updated

Re: MozillaBuild 1.9.0 test build up

On 11/26/2013 11:04 AM, Ryan VanderMeulen wrote: I just uploaded a test build of MozillaBuild 1.9.0. Please try it out and provide feedback, especially with mozmake. http://people.mozilla.org/~rvandermeulen/MozillaBuildSetup1.9.0pre.exe Notable changes in this build: * Better support for newer

Re: WebIDL Windows clobber issue hopefully resolved

On 12/12/2013 10:34 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote: Just landed in inbound are patches that hopefully resolve the issue where WebIDL changes required a clobber on Windows. Please stop touching CLOBBER when modifying WebIDL files. Please be on the lookout for WebIDL build system oddities. Please be

Re: Target Milestone field in bugzilla

On 1/9/2014 12:53 PM, Chris Peterson wrote: What is the use case for Target Milestone (in the Patches Landed In sense)? As you point out, the Target Milestone is not updated if a fix is uplifted, so Target Milestone does not even represent the first Gecko release that contains the fix. That

Re: Splitting of tests in the mochitest suite

On 1/21/2014 12:05 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: It seems to me like the splitting algorithm for mochitests gives us different chunking results on different platforms, see this test failure for example: https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Mozilla-Inboundrev=746018b05d67. Is this expected? If not, is

Re: Consensus sought - when to reset try repository?

On 2/28/2014 8:44 PM, John Schoenick wrote: Or taking this a step further, having a rolling cronjob |hg strip| revisions not on m-c older than a certain date would remove the need to perform resets entirely, and give a predictable date after which your try push would disappear. You could even

Announcing MozillaBuild 1.9.0 Release

After a long delay and lots of hard work by 7 different contributors, I am pleased to announce the final release of MozillaBuild 1.9.0. http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mozilla/libraries/win32/MozillaBuildSetup-Latest.exe There are some pretty significant changes in this release from

Re: nsRefPtr vs RefPtr

On 5/13/2014 11:25 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: The chromium IPC code is ours now, so we can mdify it as needed. Not sure about the Chromium sandbox code. Also AFAIK RefPtr was first incorporated into our code base as a way to replace wtf::RefPtr for YARR but I have no evidence that it actually

Recommended Try practices

While working to track down various job backlogs and busted pushes in our CI infrastructure, our team has observed some common anti-patterns in people's TryServer usage that contribute to these problems. In order to try to help developers find a balance between over-using and under-using Try,

Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

As many of you are aware, the sheriff team has been assisting with landing checkin-needed bugs for some time now. However, we've also had to deal with the fallout of a higher than average bustage frequency from them. As much as we enjoy shooting ourselves in the foot, our team has decided that

Re: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

One issue I often run into is that the contributor doesn't have access to try, and pushing it on their behalf disrupts the rhythm of the other things I'm doing. From http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/commit-access-policy/ Level 1 - Try/User/Incubator Access Because this is all it gives, this

Re: Update on sheriff-assisted checkin-needed bugs

Just as a quick follow-up to this - we're already seeing much lower checkin-needed backout rates since this change went into affect, so thank you all for your help! -Ryan - Original Message - From: Ryan VanderMeulen rvandermeu...@mozilla.com To: dev-b2g dev-...@lists.mozilla.org

Re: connections to external hosts during tests now cause crashes

On 6/17/2014 2:22 PM, Philipp Kewisch wrote: Hey Kent, reading bug 995417, the crash only happens if MOZ_DISABLE_NONLOCAL_CONNECTIONS is set, which is set only in the testing infrastructure. Philipp Which is actually not ideal because it means we can end up with failures on TBPL that

Re: Misunderstood the Assigned at bugs! Sorry !!!

On 7/9/2014 2:47 AM, Chris Peterson wrote: Despite its name, the Target Milestone field is usually left unset until *after* the bug is fixed. Then Target Milestone is set to the version of Firefox Nightly that was fixed (e.g. Nightly 33 is mozilla33). Even if a bug fix is uplifted from Nightly

Changes to B2G test symbols on TBPL

As we continue the transition from Travis to TBPL, it has been requested to use symbols for the different test suites that better-reflect the names Gaia devs are used to seeing. After discussions in bug 1013691 and on IRC with various stakeholders, the following changes are now live on TBPL:

Announcing MozillaBuild 1.10.0 Release

I am pleased to announce the final release of MozillaBuild 1.10.0. http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mozilla/libraries/win32/MozillaBuildSetup-Latest.exe Important changes since version 1.9.0: * Various fixes for compiler and platform SDK detection that makes building ANGLE much more

Re: Please help test e10s

On 8/25/2014 11:01 PM, Chris Peterson wrote: The e10s team has completed our M1 milestone to fix major pain points for dogfood testing. Now it's time to dogfood! :) To enable e10s, flip the browser.tabs.remote.autostart pref to true and restart Nightly. (Please don't bother testing e10s in

Re: [Sheriffs] Aurora is closed

The nightlies magically unbusted themselves. Aurora is open for business again. -Ryan - Original Message - From: Kevin Grandon kgran...@mozilla.com To: dev-gaia dev-g...@lists.mozilla.org, dev-b2g dev-...@lists.mozilla.org, dev-platform dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org Cc: Sheriffs

Re: treating B2G device tests as tier 1

On 10/15/2014 5:15 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote: Hi, This morning tomcat decided to back bug 982842 and a bunch of dependant bugs out for breaking some of the gaia device tests. As I understand things, this is not the first time something like that has happened. However I think that was a

Spotty sheriff coverage today

FYI, due to a combination of PTO and other commitments, full-time sheriff coverage is going to be spotty today. Please make an extra effort to keep an eye on any pushes you make so we hopefully avoid any big bustage pile-ups right before the weekend. Thanks! -Ryan

Re: Unified compilation is going to ride the train

On 11/27/2014 9:28 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: Another point in favor of dropping support for non-unified builds is that it frees up some infrastructure resources that is currently used to test those builds, and also makes the builds in some configurations where we build non-unified by default

Sheriff coverage over the holidays

Just a friendly reminder that over the coming weeks, there will be reduced full-time sheriff coverage due to the holidays and vacations. Please make an effort to keep an eye on your pushes to ensure that any issues are resolved in a timely fashion and minimally impact others. Thanks! -Ryan

Announcing MozillaBuild 1.11.0 Release

I am pleased to announce the final release of MozillaBuild 1.11.0. All users are encouraged to upgrade as soon as possible due to the included Mercurial security fix. http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mozilla/libraries/win32/MozillaBuildSetup-Latest.exe Important changes since version

Dropping support for MSVC2012

Having just filed my fourth MSVC2012 is busted bug since we dropped support for 2010 a few weeks ago, I'm wondering what the point of even supporting 2012 is? Are there any licensing/OS support/etc advantages to keeping it around vs. just leaving 2013 as our only supported compiler? Because

Re: Dropping support for MSVC2012

On 1/1/2015 6:08 PM, Ryan VanderMeulen wrote: Having just filed my fourth MSVC2012 is busted bug since we dropped support for 2010 a few weeks ago, I'm wondering what the point of even supporting 2012 is? Are there any licensing/OS support/etc advantages to keeping it around vs. just leaving

Re: PSA: Support for building with gcc 4.6 has been removed

This has now re-landed and stuck. GCC 4.4 running in automation is officially a thing of the past \m/ -Ryan ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: PSA: Support for building with gcc 4.6 has been removed

On 1/8/2015 9:16 PM, Joshua Cranmer  wrote: On 1/6/2015 3:33 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: I just landed bug to remove support for building with Visual C++ 2012 as per the previous dev-platform thread. Trevor Saunders has just landed the patch to de-support gcc 4.4 and 4.5 on mozilla-inbound,

Re: PSA: Support for building with Windows SDK 8.1 removed from Gecko 37

On 1/7/2015 10:20 PM, Yonggang Luo wrote: Does that means windows xp doesn't support anymore? It has no effect on that, same as how dropping support for all MSVC versions prior to 2013 didn't. -Ryan ___ dev-platform mailing list

Re: PSA: Support for building with Windows SDK 8.1 removed from Gecko 37

On 1/8/2015 11:56 AM, Joshua Cranmer  wrote: In practice, if you're building infrequently (say, provisioning a VM for Windows or Linux for occasional builds, not primary development), then 4 cores and 4GB of RAM appear to suffice (I've used 4GB for a Linux VM on my laptop and 8GB for a Windows

PSA: Support for building with Windows SDK 8.1 removed from Gecko 37

This was already implicit by making MSVC2013 the minimum supported compiler (since the 8.1 SDK ships with it anyway), but it's now explicitly been made a hard requirement in the build system as well. Various code that was obviously conditioned on older SDK versions was also cleaned up, but it's

Re: Mozillabuild 2.0 ready for testing

dialog popup saying can't find c:\mozilla-build or somesuch. Maybe there's a path hardcoded somewhere? It's a bit of a footgun since the installer defaults to a non c:\mozilla-build install dir. Thanks very much for making bzexport work! cpearce. On 3/9/2015 2:44 PM, Ryan VanderMeulen wrote

Re: Intent to not fix: Building with gcc-4.6 for Fx38+

On 3/10/2015 10:23 PM, Brian Smith wrote: (2) The trychooser tool should be extended to make it possible to build with GCC 4.7 on any platforms where it is supported, and bootstrap.py be updated to install GCC 4.7 alongside the currently-installed compiler. All Android and B2G JB/KK emulator

Mozillabuild 2.0 ready for testing

For the past many months, I have been working on some major updates to the Mozillabuild package in order to make it more developer-friendly and easily-maintainable in the future. I am proud to say that at this time, it is ready for more widespread testing. The latest test build can be downloaded

Re: PSA: IDL file changes may now be rejected by server-side hook

On 2/20/2015 7:36 PM, Eric Shepherd wrote: Is there any way we could add something that would cause a notification to go out to the MDN writing team if IDL is changed? That could have enormous repercussions on our ability to keep up with doc updates for XPCOM interfaces. Eric Shepherd Sr.

Re: Excessive inbound bustage

Some exciting statistics on these things if you're interested: http://futurama.theautomatedtester.co.uk/ I'll leave it to you to draw whatever conclusions you want. -Ryan On 4/20/2015 4:54 PM, Aaron Klotz wrote: Do I have terrible timing when it comes to landing patches, or has inbound been

Re: Excessive inbound bustage

On 4/21/2015 4:56 PM, jmath...@mozilla.com wrote: I think we're being bit too sensitive here, I'm sure we can all handle a little public shaming on stuff like this. :) If you find yourself on the top of a list like list, and you feel a bit bad about it, good. Learn from it, push to try more

Re: DXR 2.0 staged. Feedback please!

On 6/3/2015 3:10 PM, Erik Rose wrote: DXR 2.0 is about to land! This is a major revision touching every part of the system, swapping out SQLite for elasticsearch, and replacing many hard-coded C++ assumptions with a language-independent plugin interface. Please take it for a spin on the

Re: The War on Warnings

On 6/9/2015 8:33 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: Does anyone know of a case where we had a regression that traded one assertion for another? I don't. Rob How would we have found out? :) ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org

Re: Announcing MozillaBuild 2.0.0 Release

For those who are interested, bug 1119082 tracks adding build support for MSVC 2015. On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 9:00 PM, Xidorn Quan quanxunz...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Ryan VanderMeulen rvandermeu...@mozilla.com wrote: SIGNIFICANT CHANGES * Added support

Announcing MozillaBuild 2.0.0 Release

After a long wait, I am pleased to announce the final release of MozillaBuild 2.0.0. http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mozilla/libraries/win32/MozillaBuildSetup-Latest.exe Much has changed since version 1.11.0, hence the change in major version number. It is STRONGLY advised that this not be

Re: The War on Warnings

I'm 99% sure we've had mis-stars on intermittent assertion oranges where the assertion changed and nobody bothered checking the logs to notice. Various media tests are coming to mind for when that's happened. On 6/10/2015 10:10 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: On 2015-06-10 3:38 AM, David

Re: web-platform-tests on debug builds running on try

On 6/30/2015 7:35 PM, James Graham wrote: Web-platform-tests are now running in debug builds on try only. However due to some teething problems, they are not currently all green. This is expected to be fixed in the next 24 hours but, in the meantime, if you see some orange that seems unrelated

Re: Shutdown hangs are very common

On 7/6/2015 4:34 PM, Vladan D wrote: Background: Firefox shutdown hangs are turned into shutdown crashes by a watchdog thread [1] that forces a crash if shutdown hasn't completed within 1 minute. Thanks to the watchdog and the Windows profile unlocker [2], shutdown hangs aren't as frustrating

Revisions to the Job Visibility Policy

For a little over 2 years, our Job Visibility Policy has been in place to identify all the requirements necessary for a build or test suite to be visible in our infrastructure. https://wiki.mozilla.org/Sheriffing/Job_Visibility_Policy However, little has changed with the policy since TBPL was

Re: |hg bzexport| and Bugzilla two-factor authentication

On 9/16/2015 2:32 PM, Gijs Kruitbosch wrote: Filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1205376 . FWIW, part of the reason I've been using tortoisehg is that it used to make bzexport work, when it didn't work on Windows with the hg that shipped with mozillabuild. It's a little ironic

Re: Sheriffing Newsletter, End of September Edition

Included auto-closed bugs in that count sounds misleading at best. On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Wes Kocher wrote: > What if the query was changed to only count bugs resolved 'fixed'? I > believe all of the inactive intermittent bugs get closed as worksforme or >

Announcing MozillaBuild 2.1.0 Release

I am pleased to announce the final release of MozillaBuild 2.1.0. All users are encouraged to upgrade as soon as possible due to many improvements in Mercurial since the last release. http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mozilla/libraries/win32/MozillaBuildSetup-Latest.exe Important changes

Re: Using the Taskcluster index to find builds

On 11/30/2015 3:43 PM, Chris AtLee wrote: The RelEng, Cloud Services and Taskcluster teams have been doing a lot of work behind the scenes over the past few months to migrate the backend storage for builds from the old "FTP" host to S3. While we've tried to make this as seamless as possible, the

Re: Using the Taskcluster index to find builds

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Ryan VanderMeulen <rya...@gmail.com> wrote: On 11/30/2015 3:43 PM, Chris AtLee wrote: The RelEng, Cloud Services and Taskcluster teams have been doing a lot of work behind the scenes over the past few months to migrate the backend storage for builds from t

Re: mozregression – Engineering Productivity Project of the Month

I also just want to give Julien a shout out for the fantastic work he's been doing to make the tool both more versatile and also more user-friendly. If you haven't used it in awhile, give it a look! -Ryan On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Benoit Girard wrote: > I wanted to

Re: To bump mochitest's timeout from 45 seconds to 90 seconds

I'd have a much easier time accepting that argument if my experience didn't tell me that nearly every single "Test took longer than expected" or "Test timed out" intermittent ends with a RequestLongerTimeout as the fix. -Ryan On 2/9/2016 12:50 PM, Haik Aftandilian wrote: On Tue, Feb 9, 2016

Re: Intent to deprecate: MacOS 10.6-10.8 support

On 3/10/2016 5:47 PM, Masatoshi Kimura wrote: Some fullscreen tests are enabled only on 10.6: https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/dom/tests/mochitest/chrome/chrome.ini#40 This proposal will virtually disable the fullscreen tests on OS X. |skip-if = os != 'mac' || os_version ==

Re: Intent to deprecate: MacOS 10.6-10.8 support

On 3/10/2016 6:38 PM, Nils Ohlmeier wrote: Excuse my ignorance, but what means “deprecate support” exactly? I’m only asking because of the opposing reply’s so far. I’m assuming it means we stop testing and building/releasing for these. Would it be a possible alternative to turn of the tests,

Re: Intent to deprecate: MacOS 10.6-10.8 support

25% is pretty close for 10.6-10.8 combined. However, the current proposal includes security patches for nearly a year still (putting them on the ESR45 train), so construing this as abandoning those users seems like it's going a bit far. On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Mike Hommey

Re: Announcing MozillaBuild 2.2.0 Release

Darn it, I caught and fixed that when I posted the link in the tracking bug for 2.2.0 but missed it in this post. Anyway, the installer is signed by MoCo for this release, so you can verify that what you downloaded is legit that way. Also, you can verify that the sha256 hash is

Announcing MozillaBuild 2.2.0 Release

I am pleased to announce the final release of MozillaBuild 2.2.0. http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mozilla/libraries/win32/MozillaBuildSetup-Latest.exe Important changes since version 2.1.0: * Updated Mercurial to version 3.7.3. * Added the optional hgwatchman extension (disabled by

Re: Two talos jobs for PGO builds on fx-team and m-i

On 5/12/2016 10:51 AM, Armen Zambrano G. wrote: IIUC, we have PGO builds running on fx-team and m-i every 6 hours. This only affects Linux x64 and Windows (not Mac). The test pools are shared between all repositories. This entails 14 extra jobs for Windows XP and Windows 8. This entails 16

Re: Updating 32-bit Windows users to 64-bit Windows builds?

Flash installs the 32-bit and 64-bit plugin versions side by side already (in System32 and SysWOW64, respectively), so I don't think that's an issue here. -Ryan On 5/12/2016 3:38 PM, Lawrence Mandel wrote: Do we need this criteria? RAM - Does it hurt to move an instance that has <4GB? NPAPI

PSA: Cancel your old Try pushes

I'm sure most of you have experienced the pain of long backlogs on Try (Windows in particular). While we'd all love to have larger pools of test machines (and our Ops people are actively working on improving that!), one often-overlooked thing people can do to help with the backlog Right Now is to

Re: Ignoring viewpoints of non-Mozilla-employees can't be the way to go for a OSS project!

On 5/9/2016 2:23 PM, Tobias B. Besemer wrote: Hi! Ignoring viewpoints of non-Mozilla-employees can't be the way to go for a OSS Project! The same mistake made Oracle with OpenOffice! Now the project is almost death! Think Mozilla should find his way back to his roots! Would be nice, if some

Re: Checkin-needed requests - Please include complete information in the commit message :)

FWIW, there's also an MDN page that documents a lot of this as well: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mercurial/Using_Mercurial#How_can_I_generate_a_patch_for_somebody_else_to_check-in_for_me.3F -Ryan On 7/8/2016 2:32 AM, Carsten Book wrote: Hi, someone might not know that doing

Please don't abuse "No bug" in commit messages

A friendly reminder that per the MDN commit rules, the use of "No bug" in the commit message is to be used sparingly - in general for minor things like whitespace changes/comment fixes/etc where traceability isn't as important.

Re: Aarch64 as higher than tier-3?

On 1/23/2017 1:00 PM, Henri Sivonen wrote: Are there any plans to support Aarch64 as a tier higher than tier-3? For Android or the upcoming Aarch64 flavor of Windows 10 maybe? Is Google shipping a 64-bit Android emulator for aarch64 yet? Last I knew, they only supported x86 for their 64-bit

Late-cycle Regression Bug Analysis

I was recently asked to look at regression bugs found late in the beta cycle or post-release to see what discernible trends there might be and how it might inform our testing strategy going forward. I looked at all bugs that met those criteria that were filed against Firefox 46-50 up through

Re: Firefox Engineering TMO Survey

Looks like the body of the email got lost! In order to make telemetry.mozilla.org (TMO) and related sites a tool that better supports the needs of the Firefox engineering teams, we would like to collect feedback about people's experiences using these tools. It shouldn't take more than a few

Re: Firefox Engineering TMO Survey

Just a friendly reminder to please consider filling out this survey if you haven't already done so. We've already gotten a lot of great feedback and we'd love to get more! It will be open for responses until Friday the 30th. Thanks! -Ryan On 9/23/2016 3:25 PM, Ryan VanderMeulen wrote

Re: Expanding regular regression triage to include crashes?

I like the idea in principle, but in practice, two meetings a week is already not enough to get through regression bugs. Are we going to add more meetings to accommodate this? And I'll note that already, attendance of the regular regression triage meetings has declined from where it was a

Re: What are your use cases for the Touch Bar on the new MacBook Pro?

Will this API be accessible to addons? Seems like this would be a good place for people to explore and iterate. On 1/3/2017 12:17 PM, Stephen A Pohl wrote: We will develop[1] a solid 1.0 API around the top features to get the ball rolling and will iterate on these going forward.

Re: tier-2 Windows clang-cl static analysis builds running on inbound

On 12/23/2016 3:21 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: Hooray! What is the name of the job on Treeherder? I see a "Windows 2012 x64 opt Executed by TaskCluster build-win64-clang/opt tc(Bcl)" job (and some minor variations) but I suspect that's not the new static analysis one? There's a tc(S) job

Re: Async Iteration is available on non-release-only, for testing purpose

Let's make sure to add a test that's expected to fail as well for this so we can verify that we don't accidentally ship this enabled in chrome. Not that we've had any recent instances of thinking we'd disabled a feature only for it to get unknowingly shipped :) -Ryan On 3/27/2017 12:31 PM,

Nightly updates frozen

Due to some font-related topcrashes, nightly build updates are currently frozen on yesterday's build. Backouts that'll hopefully fix it are on mozilla-central and respins are in progress. Once they're finished, RelEng will un-freeze. Thanks, Ryan ___

Re: Changes to Firefox repositories on hg.mozilla.org

On 4/6/2017 7:13 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote: https://mozilla-version-control-tools.readthedocs.io/ en/latest/hgmozilla/installing.html Just to call it out explicitly since I've seen the question come up a number of times recently - Windows Mozillabuild users do *not* need to wait for a

Re: Announcing MozillaBuild 3.0 Release

Apologies as well for the awful formatting job there. Thanks Gmail. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Announcing MozillaBuild 3.0 Release

I am pleased to announce the final release of MozillaBuild 3.0! Sorry in advance for the length of this message, but there's a lot of changes in this release worth calling out. https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/libraries/win32/MozillaBuildSetup-Latest.exe

Re: Announcing MozillaBuild 3.0 Release

It appears that the formatting of that email was pretty well destroyed when sent out. Here's a direct link to the release notes in Google Doc form: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NDz7ROxTYNB5YnP7VJ5CmJomQDun-7o4HDtSRLkuPaw/edit -Ryan On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 6:02 PM, Ryan VanderMeulen

  1   2   >