On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 9:16 AM, vridosh vrid...@gmail.com wrote:
As far as I
understand, that's why Debugger tab was not available in test_shell in
early Chromium builds.
Probably the real reason is because test_shell isn't meant to be a reference
implementation of everything and we never
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Dirk Pranke dpra...@chromium.org wrote:
So, you then get the following algorithm:
1) if there is a ':' in the URI, you split the URI into scheme and
scheme-specific part.
2) If there is a scheme:
2.1) If the scheme is a recognized/supported one, dispatch
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 2:25 AM, Alex Gartrell alexgartr...@gmail.comwrote:
I've decided to try to tackle crbug.com/20005 (thanks Peter for the
list). I'll dive into it more tomorrow. I don't know if there's an
'assignee' role or something on the bug tracker, but I'm currently
working under
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 9:54 PM, Alex Gartrell alexgartr...@gmail.comwrote:
- We both submitted patches that were accepted to Mozilla as part of
the prerequisite course to this one (So we know about dvcs, the patch
submission process, etc.)
One thing to note is that Chromium uses neither a
Ever think of using Web Sockets?
PK
--
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Alex Gartrell alexgartr...@gmail.comwrote:
Pam's right in that we're looking for a 'Chromium mentor'.
Right. I understood that, and might be willing to do it; I was more
concerned with what you were actually interested in working on (in terms of
size and
Dimitri, the LTTF, and anyone else involved, you are awesome, and I consider
your work to have the largest importance / (satisfaction + recognition)
value on the team. This is a thankless task. You have given me hope that
someday we could conceivably reach 0 failures.
PK
--
Chromium Developers
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Scott Hess sh...@google.com wrote:
[BTW, don't take my argument as support for allowing relative paths on
the command-line. It's such a low-volume use-case that I'd be
perfectly fine requiring explicit fully-qualified URLs and be done
with it.
:( This
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 4:48 AM, OwenCM owencmo...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi, I've been scouring the groups and can't find the answer anywhere,
what time scale are we looking at until the dev branch hits m5?
What do you mean by hits m5? Do you mean, the major version stamp gets
changed from 4
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Scott Hess sh...@google.com wrote:
If you try to open a
relative path and it doesn't work, you go Oh, right, relative path.
No, actually, what I say every time is What the heck, why did it try to
open this as a hostname? and then I laboriously navigate through
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Peter Kasting pkast...@google.com wrote:
I don't think Victor's objections have merit.
(For public benefit)
Partly because you can't put ':' in a filename on Windows, which is the OS
where local files aren't resolved. On the Mac opening local files already
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Evan Martin e...@chromium.org wrote:
At the code level I think it's not too hard for us to be aliasing
correct (people like Craig have already fixed all of the places where
we were wrong, and we have tools like bit_cast in basictypes.h to
make it not too
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Craig Schlenter craig.schlen...@gmail.com
wrote:
I'm one try-server run away from possibly turning -fno-strict-aliasing on
for
all linux/bsd gcc: http://codereview.chromium.org/519034
From a process standpoint, given that there is some disagreement here
is
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Craig Schlenter
craig.schlen...@chromium.org wrote:
Other than the immediate gain of hiding crbug.com/28749,
Which you have a patch (actually two, but one with r+) for, right?
I think the biggest
benefit is that end users relying on 4.4 builds are likely
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Evan Martin e...@chromium.org wrote:
PS: I'd be willing to flip the flag just after we do the next beta
channel push and see how many more problems we get because of it.
But in general, if it doesn't buy us any performance and it does cause
hard-to-track-down
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Craig Schlenter craig.schlen...@gmail.com
wrote:
Do we have other aliasing problems? If so my opinion changes.
There are some aliasing issues still in play. Off the top of my head:
1. unit_tests has what might be an issue in stl_tree.h or a compiler issue
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 2:28 PM, mpcompl...@chromium.org wrote:
I've shared Extensions
Incognitohttp://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AbzUSl_g6CjAZGdzZHJnanJfM2RiY3N3dmZzhl=eninvite=CJ3Si8MG
*
*
The idea of having the ability to do both read-only and read-write access to
the main profile is
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:37 PM, Craig Schlenter
craig.schlen...@chromium.org wrote:
That makes the compiler toss an aliasing error immediately:
cc1plus: warnings being treated as errors
base/rand_util_posix.cc: In function ‘uint64 base::RandUint64()’:
base/rand_util_posix.cc:32: error:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Pierre-Antoine LaFayette
pierre.lafaye...@gmail.com wrote:
Is it illegal for the WebKit glue layer to send synchronous messages to the
browser requesting the icon data URI?
I don't know, but in general sync messages suck. Why couldn't you use an
async
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 12:15 AM, hap 497 hap...@gmail.com wrote:
So how does renderer process knows the whole page is loaded completely
and tell the browser process to stop the spinning icons and shows the
favicon of the page?
Sounds like you should start by looking in the browser for what
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 7:42 PM, alokp al...@chromium.org wrote:
SVN Gurus,
I have a question about my CL - http://codereview.chromium.org/527016/show
.
Mac and Linux trybots are failing at the patch stage due to line
endings. The files in my cl were originally submitted with wrong line-
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Alok Priyadarshi al...@google.com wrote:
Yes thats what I did to fix line-endings: svn pset svn:eol-style LF.
But this CL contains other changes as well in addition to fixing
line-endings. Should I do them in separate CLs?
Yes, I would do them in separate
If you have ever used any of the EmptyXXX() functions, or ever will, please
read on.
These functions (in string_util.h and gurl.h) are meant for a single,
specific use case:
const std::string MyClass::foo() const {
return (everything == OK) ? member_string : EmptyString();
}
Here you cannot
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Fady Samuel fadysam...@gmail.com wrote:
What about allowing the renderer to run asynchronously with the
script? Right now you're either producing the view or you're running script
but never both concurrently, correct? Parallelizing them should not
introduce
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
(As discussed during lunch...) Why not just do this in this case and
remove EmptyString() altogether?
const std::string MyClass::foo() const {
static std::string empty = EmptyString();
return (everything == OK) ?
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
What about renaming the function? EmptyStringHACK() or something?
It's not a hack. It's a perfectly legitimate thing to use, and not
something we're going to get rid of, unlike ToWStringHack().
Darin suggested we could
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Albert Wong (王重傑) ajw...@google.com wrote:
Is there something wrong with returning by copy, and relying on the
compiler to execute a return value optimization?
I'm not totally sure what your comment is saying.
If you are saying that everywhere in the code can
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Aaron Boodman a...@google.com wrote:
Out of curiosity, what is wrong with using EmptyString() in those
cases? Is there a correctness problem? Unnecessary inclusion of
string_util.h?
There are a couple reasons. Code clarity and consistency is a primary one;
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Michael Nordman micha...@google.com wrote:
Where as It looks like GURL::EmptyGURL() may be a tad less costly than
GURL().
Not if you ever need to initialize another GURL with it (since the compiler
can't collapse the copy). Which is true much of the time that
A while ago, Ben Goodger (our fearless tech lead) wrote up a set of core
principles around Chromium. If you have not read and pondered these, please
do:
http://dev.chromium.org/developers/core-principles
In particular, as we've had more contributors both inside and outside Google
over the past
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Darin Fisher da...@chromium.org wrote:
There are some caches in webkit (the resource cache in particular, but
there are others) that would be nice to share between processes.
If you look into this, note that there are major tricky issues here around
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Fady Samuel fadysam...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm also interested in looking into state that is already shared but makes
excessive use of locking and may be hindering performance.
I'm not aware of anything that really falls into this category. We share
the visited
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Fady Samuel fadysam...@gmail.com wrote:
So as Peter said a lot of this cache state will not be used in multiple
tabs because many of these tabs will be different webpages. That's not to
say that one doesn't open multiple pages from a single site however, in
(re-adding chromium-dev)
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 5:58 PM, Fady Samuel fadysam...@gmail.com wrote:
Was this done to reduce memory overhead?
No, it was done because the newly opened pages and the original pages can
script each other. From what I understand, making sites in different
processes
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Fady Samuel fadysam...@gmail.com wrote:
I know I'm asking you a lot of questions here.
And you keep removing chromium-dev. Why? I'm not the knowledgeable person
about much of this stuff, I'm just trying to be helpful.
Alex mentioned the Webkit DOM tree,
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Fady Samuel fadysam...@gmail.com wrote:
So a script cannot execute concurrently with the traversal of the DOM tree?
Could this be a performance bottleneck?
Pretty much nothing in the renderer can execute concurrently with other
things in the renderer. There
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Andy Ames a...@amesgames.net wrote:
I have added a preference to pref_names.h/cc.
In chrome/browser/browser.cc, I added the regisration of the user
preference to ths static Browser::RegisterUserPrefs(PrefService*
prefs) function:
On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 2:32 AM, Andy Ames a...@amesgames.net wrote:
I am considering using a separate switch such as --supress-print-
dialog, since kiosk mode and suppressing the print dialog are
orthogonal features.
They don't seem orthogonal, since in kiosk mode it doesn't seem like you
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@google.com wrote:
2) Info bar. This seems like one of the more popular options at the
moment.
This is a bad idea, we shouldn't do it. It's not as annoying as a modal
dialog, it has problems with clashing with other infobars on start.
On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 12:59 AM, PhistucK phist...@gmail.com wrote:
Though, I think, currently, there is no way to inject bookmarks.
I believe there is, or will be, because I believe we've had this request
before.
PK
--
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View
We have at least some capabilities here since our installer can set some of
these values. I'm not sure what all the capabilities are.
Make sure you don't get confused by discussions about about:config and
similar. Generally those are about either add more prefs or add a way to
get at more prefs
Chromium code has the concept of a Profile. All renderers are associated
with a profile. There is one cookie store per profile.
By default, renderers are all given the same profile. When you use
Incognito mode, for the purposes of cookies you can think of it like
creating a new profile which
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Evan Stade est...@chromium.org wrote:
To put it a different way, the cost of supporting these now is basically
indistinguishable from the cost of just adding --new-window.
in terms of code, I don't think that's true. The current patch is extremely
light
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 10:33 AM, Darin Fisher da...@chromium.org wrote:
I think for parity with other apps, we should provide a command line switch
to force the WindowOpenDisposition to NEW_WINDOW. For bonus points,
we could expose other dispositions.
Given mdm's explanation, I agree. And
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Evan Stade est...@chromium.org wrote:
I think adding a --disposition= field is overkill and will be harder to
maintain (which is the worst part about command line flags). If a new
disposition is added to webkit, one is renamed, or one is deleted, are you
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Evan Stade est...@chromium.org wrote:
we have had a lot of bug reports asking for NEW_WINDOW, but none for these
two dispositions. What use cases do you envisage?
Wanting to open pages in either of these ways? Firefox used to have options
to control this and
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Clemens Fruhwirth
clem...@endorphin.orgwrote:
http://codereview.chromium.org/464060 adds the small one-line feature
to open an URL in a new window from commandline
Can any review these changes?
Please read
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 1:57 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
As for the info bar/modal dialog: I've been thinking for a bit, and I'm
not sure this is enough. We have plenty of data that shows users often
leave browsers open for a very long time. The main risk is that someone
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:01 AM, PhistucK phist...@gmail.com wrote:
But, as I understand, some people do use it due to issues with the sandbox,
real issues, system incompatibilities.
That would be really unfair towards them.
Most issues should be fixable. We need to hear about problems the
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Jonathan Dixon j...@chromium.org wrote:
In essence:
return DoWork(foo)
#if defined(OS_POSIX)
DoWork(posix_specific)
#endif
; // -- Lint complains about this guy
I'd prefer this:
#if defined(OS_POSIX)
return DoWork(foo)
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Jacob Mandelson ja...@mandelson.orgwrote:
If something extra in an expression is a common case, I've sometimes
seen it done like:
return DoWork(foo) POSIX_ONLY( DoWork(posix_specific));
where POSIX_ONLY will expand to nothing or its argument.
It's ugly,
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 5:02 PM, Avi Drissman a...@google.com wrote:
Q: Can't we have the extensions gallery warn that it won't work?
A: Sorry, we can't do that in an automated fashion. The extensions author
should mention it. Too bad they don't.
But we explicitly review patches with binary
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 8:22 PM, Darin Fisher da...@chromium.org wrote:
Perhaps --enable-webgl should instead implicitly disable the sandbox today
I think this is better than having users manually disable it. They'll be
running without a sandbox either way, but this (a) makes the enabling
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 9:38 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.org wrote:
We disable --single-process and --in-process-plugins on release Google
Chrome builds to avoid the support headache that it causes. I think we
should do the same for --no-sandbox.
There are legit reasons we have
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 5:30 AM, MAD m...@chromium.org wrote:
Thanks pkasting@ for trying this with
http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=revrevision=34108
But as the page cyclers dashboard seem to confirm, this is still a
issue... :-(
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 3:48 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.org wrote:
Lately I've been seeing more and more // NOLINT added to the code. It's
great that people are running lint to make sure that they're following the
guidelines, but I personally find adding comments or gibberish to our
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Ian Fette i...@chromium.org wrote:
Putting on my individual contributor hat here, I have to say that Ben's
solution would seem very non-intuitive to me. I'm not aware of any app that
works that way, and I would probably think that the dialog was just cut off
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Evan Stade est...@chromium.org wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Peter Kasting pkast...@google.com wrote:
* We have crazy word wrapping. The bookmark sync text could fit on one
line. Why does it wrap? etc. elsewhere
yes, we can save two lines
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Ben Goodger (Google) b...@chromium.orgwrote:
BTW I think the Use Gtk Theme button should be replaced by a special
theme that triggers this mode, much like the default theme we have
in the theme gallery. This would make the selection of this mode vs.
others feel
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Evan Stade est...@chromium.org wrote:
this makes the assumption that there is some best setting for each WM,
which is false. What's best for me on metacity is not what's best for you on
metacity.
Unfortunately, if you really believe that, then for one of us
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Drew Wilson atwil...@chromium.org wrote:
I currently am special-casing incognito windows, so incognito windows don't
share workers with non-incognito workers, but I don't do anything to deal
with profiles in general (so if you were running with separate
Sigh, resending now that I have re-added my address to Groups after it got
auto-removed :(
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Peter Kasting pkast...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Panayiotis Mavrommatis
panayio...@google.com wrote:
I'm not sure if my email did reach
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Darin Fisher da...@chromium.org wrote:
Chrome now supports a handy command line flag that'll show you the regions
of the
page that are being re-painted. This can be helpful if you are tracking
down repaint
issues.
$ chrome --show-paint-rects
It's
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Antony Sargent asarg...@chromium.orgwrote:
I just updated to revision 33425, and a clean build (manually deleted Debug
directory before opening .sln file) gives the following error in
service_runtime_x86. I'm running Visual Studio 2008 on Vista x64. Anyone
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Kenneth Russell k...@chromium.org wrote:
While investigating
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=21921 I observed
that on Windows that when the Chrome window is resized, a Skia canvas
the size of the entire window is allocated and discarded in
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Adam Barth aba...@chromium.org wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:38 AM, John Gregg john...@google.com wrote:
if you whitelist an
origin for popups while in incognito mode, that origin is whitelisted
permanently even when you go back to normal mode. And in
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:49 PM, John Gregg john...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Peter Kasting pkast...@google.comwrote:
This is the sort of thing for which Profile::ServiceAccessType was
invented. Ideally, things like recording whitelisted popup hosts should
request
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:38 AM, John Gregg john...@google.com wrote:
if you whitelist an origin for popups while in incognito mode, that origin
is whitelisted permanently even when you go back to normal mode.
On further reflection I'm convinced persisting these changes is wrong. I
have now
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Glenn Wilson gwil...@chromium.org wrote:
Investigating using a flat file for safebrowsing instead of SQLite (need to
recreate bloom filter and watch disk I/O)
jam crunched some numbers here. During the bloom filter recreation process
we read about 50 MB and
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Dirk Pranke dpra...@chromium.org wrote:
As an aside, have we looked at using DirectWrite() on Windows?
crbug.com/25541
(No)
PK
--
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Mike Belshe mbel...@google.com wrote:
I think we should have a list of low-level functionality which we just
never cleanup.
For the items you listed, I think you should leak them all. Trying to
cleanup these items creates complicated code and ultimately
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Evan Martin e...@chromium.org wrote:
I have been particularly frustrated with gcc warning bugs that have
been fixed in newer versions of gcc. In older gccs, the following
code produces a variable may be used uninitialized warning depending
on your
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Evan Martin e...@chromium.org wrote:
This works for warnings we know about now, but not warnings that will
occur in the future, which is the larger problem.
I'd say we break the automated Ubuntu builds every couple of weeks
(and get an additional report from
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Mark Mentovai m...@chromium.org wrote:
As Evan points out, there are some cases when it's not absolutely
necessary to have a base or interface class declare a virtual
destructor.
For a concrete example, take AutocompleteEditController, which is declared
in
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 1:31 PM, James Robinson jam...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Peter Kasting pkast...@google.comwrote:
For a concrete example, take AutocompleteEditController, which is declared
in autocomplete_edit.h. This is an abstract base class that names
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Jacob Mandelson ja...@mandelson.orgwrote:
http://codereview.chromium.org/201100/show
Yes, that caused a large subsequent discussion at which it seemed like it
was determined that this was fine. I was surprised to hear this issue come
up again because I'd
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Jacob Mandelson ja...@mandelson.orgwrote:
I had the impression that at the end of the discussion you were still
against. Can you LG 201100 and 200106 ?
Done. I didn't bother looking at the patch, I assume you did the right
thing and followed relevant style
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 3:06 PM, James Robinson jam...@google.com wrote:
I'd also favor just going with virtual d'tors rather than protected
non-virtual ones. Protected virtual if you want to enforce that the object
is never deleted via a ptr to the base class.
I have no opinion here so
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Evan Martin e...@chromium.org wrote:
Also, another option for these users is to write their own
translations and let downstream (Chromium distributors) ship them.
I do think it would be nice to document somewhere how someone could build a
Chromium with their
This morning I checked in the central bits of the MemoryPurger. This allows
you to start Chrome with --purge-memory-button, which will add a button to
the Task Manager called Purge Memory. Pressing this button will attempt
to free as much memory as possible* from the browser and renderer
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Peter Kasting pkast...@google.com wrote:
*Currently purged:
Browser process: History backend, Web data backend (search keywords
etc.), Proxy resolver JS heaps, Safe Browsing backend, TCMalloc free pages
Chase noted I forgot to list one other thing I'm purging
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Elliot Glaysher (Chromium)
e...@chromium.org wrote:
Currently, it only runs it at (gcl/git cl)
upload time and only generates warnings. In the future, it should
error at commit time, but I want to put this through a trial period so
please pay attention to
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Evan Martin ev...@google.com wrote:
Since we're talking about style, I'll note that this pattern is no
good (and I've seen it explicitly called out somewhere before).
The problem is that your assertions are not helpful. You get
expected 'foo', got 'bar' on
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 11:14 AM, OuterLimits procoolh...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been using this forever but I had to rebuild windows from scratch
a few days ago and had to download everything again but now chromium
updater 'fails to initialize'
This is what I've been using below.. Is there
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Steven Knight s...@chromium.org wrote:
Let me know if you notice any problems or have any suggestions for making
this more useful.
My lone suggestion is that page-load-time isn't accurate for all rows --
for example, the SunSpider row is measuring a benchmark
Does this warning help anyone, anywhere, for any reason? It's on explicitly
for the Mac and implicitly for Linux, and when you combine it with Warn As
Error and Visual Studio not auto-adding a trailing newline, it means my
patches frequently trivially fail to compile on the trybots. Easy fix,
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Ian Fette i...@chromium.org wrote:
Lint will warn you about this -- and I know that everyone runs gcl lint
changelist_name before uploading...
Why do I have to remember to run a separate command? Why does this not run
during presubmit?
PK
--
Chromium
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Chris Bentzel cbent...@gmail.com wrote:
Should I spend time trying to flesh these
out and add to net/tools, or is this something which doesn't belong in
the chromium codebase?
I'm weakly against the idea, since adding dependencies increases the burden
when
At lunch today, a few of us discussed the idea of moving from two sheriffs
to four.
There are several reasons we contemplated such a change:
* The team is large enough that on the current schedule, you go months
between sheriffing, which is so long that you forget things like what tools
help you
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Ben Goodger b...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Peter Kasting pkast...@google.com
wrote:
* The team is large enough that on the current schedule, you go months
between sheriffing, which is so long that you forget things like what
tools
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Stuart Morgan stuartmor...@google.comwrote:
If we end up actually having four at a time that seems likely to be
worse than two: either four people are doing nothing but sheriffing,
which there is probably not enough work for, or all four people are
more
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Finnur Thorarinsson fin...@google.comwrote:
If the sheriff load is too much for two people to devote 100% of their time
to, then there is something wrong with the process.
It's clearly too much, given that I hardly see any other sheriffs even
attempt to
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Stuart Morgan stuartmor...@google.comwrote:
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Peter Kasting pkast...@google.com
wrote:
Sheriffs are in theory supposed to watch all the perf bots too. Do you?
I
don't. I doubt very many people do.
That's probably mostly
It sounds like so far there is more support for the idea of three sheriffs
than four. What if I modify the proposal to be:
* Change from two sheriffs to three
* Try to ensure that one of those three is non-PST if this is possible
without overloading teams outside MTV (this will probably get more
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Dirk Pranke dpra...@chromium.org wrote:
I think two sheriffs in US/Pacific during US/Pacific work hours is
plenty.
I was told at lunch that we already try to some degree to schedule PST with
non-PST people (although obvioulsy there are far more of the former),
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Ojan Vafai o...@google.com wrote:
The goal of the sheriff is to keep the tree open as long as possible
without carpeting over regressions. The sheriff should suffer through minor
flakiness without closing the tree (e.g. a couple flaky webkit tests should
not
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Nico Weber tha...@chromium.org wrote:
I would appreciate if folks with IME experience could comment on
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31502 .
+CC jshin
PK
--
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Ojan Vafai o...@google.com wrote:
This is a long-standing WebKit bug. The current behavior is correct for
Mac. Linux/Win should behave as you expect. Patches welcome. :)
Isn't this one of the things you had a patch for that you just haven't
committed due to
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Ojan Vafai o...@google.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Peter Kasting pkast...@google.comwrote:
Isn't this one of the things you had a patch for that you just haven't
committed due to the testing burden? If so, can I beg you again to commit
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Jeff Mikels jeffmik...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know if people consider this a problem or not, but 4.0
introduced new behavior for access keys.
What OS? I'm guessing Linux? (Keys are different on all OSes)
I have no idea what guarantees browsers try to make
1 - 100 of 451 matches
Mail list logo
