Why not just let the extension developer do different versions him/herself.
When I download an extension, I don't want to download libraries/plugins
from 10 different architectures. If my operating system is Windows, I would
want to download just the .dll file. The extension developer could
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Jacob Mandelson ja...@mandelson.org wrote:
It was more surprised that I was expected to have built chrome at home
under multiple platforms.
I wouldn't say that we expect people to build chrome at home under
multiple platforms. We expect patches not to break
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 5:40 PM, Mike Morearty m...@morearty.com wrote:
Then let's say the Flash app hits the line where the breakpoint is.
The Flash player notifies Flash Builder of the breakpoint, and then
blocks, waiting on a socket until Flash Builder tells it what to do
next (e.g.
I think that is a reasonable feature request. It would be nice however if
there were some way to know when to restore the old behavior.
Unfortunately, Chrome won't know when you are done.
-Darin
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 2:10 PM, Mike Morearty m...@morearty.com wrote:
We just discussed that,
To simplify Matt's message:
$ git svn find-rev r$(curl -s http://chromium-status.appspot.com/lkgr)
8672ced71672761c86c4f5b59d8b49765f35a525
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Paweł Hajdan Jr.
phajdan...@chromium.org wrote:
I think it would be simpler to modify git-cl to know which git commit
Also, the inspector already disables the hang monitor dynamically when
it stops at a breakpoint since the renderer is stopped at that point,
so this may just be a case of exposing this on-off switch via some
API.
Erik
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Evan Martin e...@chromium.org wrote:
I
For reference, something similar is done for popups:
void NPN_PushPopupsEnabledState(NPP instance, NPBool enabled);
void NPN_PopPopupsEnabledState(NPP instance);
Perhaps we can do the same thing here:
void NPN_PushPluginHangDetectorState(NPP instance, NPBool enabled);
void NPN_Pop
Another alternative would be a ping type call to say I'm
unresponsive, and I mean it. Like a watchdog timer. The plug-in
could still effectively be hung, but at least it has to have things
together enough to call the watchdog.
-scott
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 3:37 PM, John Abd-El-Malek
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:38 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.org wrote:
I presume you're referring to Chrome extensions? I don't see the advantage
of making this depend on the plugin being distributed via extensions.
How else would an end-user get a plugin installed for Chrome? I don't
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Scott Hess sh...@chromium.org wrote:
Another alternative would be a ping type call to say I'm
unresponsive, and I mean it. Like a watchdog timer. The plug-in
could still effectively be hung, but at least it has to have things
together enough to call the
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Mike Mammarella m...@chromium.org wrote:
Perhaps rather than disabling the hang monitor altogether what that
could do is add an additional option to the warning the first time:
don't notify me again. If you click that, then it will disable the
hang monitor
Since the hang dialog comes up in the future after you've shifted your
focus elsewhere, if we did any sort of user interaction at all I'd
rather the plug-in could say Ask user for permission to disable hang
monitor for this context right now. The plug-in hits the breakpoint,
calls that function,
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:37 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.org wrote:
For reference, something similar is done for popups:
void NPN_PushPopupsEnabledState(NPP instance, NPBool enabled);
void NPN_PopPopupsEnabledState(NPP instance);
Perhaps we can do the same thing here:
void
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Scott Hess sh...@chromium.org wrote:
Since the hang dialog comes up in the future after you've shifted your
focus elsewhere, if we did any sort of user interaction at all I'd
rather the plug-in could say Ask user for permission to disable hang
monitor for this
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 3:54 PM, John Tamplin j...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:37 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.orgwrote:
For reference, something similar is done for popups:
void NPN_PushPopupsEnabledState(NPP instance, NPBool enabled);
void
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 3:44 PM, John Tamplin j...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:38 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.orgwrote:
I presume you're referring to Chrome extensions? I don't see the
advantage of making this depend on the plugin being distributed via
extensions.
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 3:44 PM, John Tamplin j...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:38 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.orgwrote:
I presume you're referring to Chrome extensions? I don't see the
advantage of making this depend on the plugin being distributed via
extensions.
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Mike Morearty m...@morearty.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 3:54 PM, John Tamplin j...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:37 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.orgwrote:
For reference, something similar is done for popups:
void
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 7:31 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.org wrote:
If this sounds good to you, the next step would be getting a broader
discussion with other browser vendors on the plugin-futures mailing list (
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/plugin-futures).
Since the other
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 7:28 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.org wrote:
Through whatever plugin installer they have (i.e. Flash's installer) or the
toolkit (i.e. Flash Builder).
So are you suggesting there is a better way to package an NPAPI plugin for
Chrome than to build a CRX? On
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 4:32 PM, John Tamplin j...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 7:31 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.orgwrote:
If this sounds good to you, the next step would be getting a broader
discussion with other browser vendors on the plugin-futures mailing list (
So, since Flash is installed by means other than as part of an Extension,
does that mean that John Tamplin's suggestion of giving permissions via
manifest.json won't work for me? I take it manifest.json is something that
only applies to extensions, and not to the other methods of installing a
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Mike Morearty m...@morearty.com wrote:
So, since Flash is installed by means other than as part of an Extension,
does that mean that John Tamplin's suggestion of giving permissions via
manifest.json won't work for me? I take it manifest.json is something that
DevToolsSanityTest flips frequently between enabled and disabled. It seems
to be mostly caused by changes in WebKit. I see two nice ways to prevent
that:
- run the tests upstream on webkit.org bots (probably hard)
- run the tests on our webkit canary bot (should be doable)
What do you think?
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Jacob Mandelson ja...@mandelson.org wrote:
The trybot is restricted access to committers only.
I'm not a committer, and as such I don't have access.
go/chrometryserver
M-A
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Chromium Developers mailing list:
I'm trying to create a simple dialog box following the exam at
http://dev.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/views-windowing.
Note that I'm using views as in a standalone app (I'm not embedding
this dialog in Chromium).
I've added 2 views::Textfields to WindowView, but I can't seem to tab
I agree it should be the responsibility of the committer to make sure
the code passes the trybots on all platforms (I have in the past made
the mistake of thinking the trybots were open to everyone, but they
are not). I think many committers will not be willing to go through
very many iterations
I generally leave the figure out the errors bit to the committer.
Once you've made sure a patch isn't malicious:
git checkout origin
git cl patch -b theirname 12345 # code review number
git try
git checkout branch_i_was_working_on
You can then point them to the try server build page and
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Evan Martin e...@chromium.org wrote:
I generally leave the figure out the errors bit to the committer.
I assume you mean the contributor. The problem is then that you are
trusting a non-committer to tell you whether to commit, which defeats
the purpose of having
We could do this instead:gcl try --url http://url/to/patch.diff --email
contribut...@email.com --issue rietveldIssueNumber
No need to download and apply the patch.
- Mohamed Mansour
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 10:03 PM, Evan Martin e...@chromium.org wrote:
I generally leave the figure out the
30 matches
Mail list logo
