Re: Test automation addons and signing

On 28/02/2016 09:45, Bobby Holley wrote: >> We were promised that trunk and aurora builds would not enforce addon >> signing when xpinstall.signatures.required=false. I did not see any >> discussion about rescinding this commitment. > We also run automation on release-channel builds to test the

Proposed W3C Charter: Hardware Security Working Group

The W3C is proposing a charter for: Hardware Security Working Group https://www.w3.org/2015/hasec/2015-hasec-charter.html https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2016Feb/0009.html Mozilla has the opportunity to send comments or objections through Friday, April 1. Please reply

Proposed W3C Charter: TV Control Working Group

The W3C is proposing a charter for: TV Control Working Group https://www.w3.org/2016/02/tvcontrol.html https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2016Feb/0005.html Mozilla has the opportunity to send comments or objections through Friday, March 18. Please reply to this thread if

Proposed W3C Charters: three Internationalization groups

The W3C is proposing charters for three Internationalization groups: Internationalization (i18n) Working Group https://www.w3.org/International/core/charter-2016.html Internationalization (i18n) Interest Group https://www.w3.org/International/ig/charter-2016.html

Proposed W3C Charter: Pointer Events Working Group

The W3C is proposing a charter for: Pointer Events Working Group https://www.w3.org/2016/02/pointer-events-2015.html https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2016Feb/.html Mozilla has the opportunity to send comments or objections through Friday, March 4. Please reply to

Re: Does SSE2 usage still need to be conditional?

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Ralph Giles wrote: > Would it result in drama if it's just a bug with an easy fix? Distros' > support policies are different from ours as their upstream. Perhaps we > should just try it without the `-C target-feature=-sse2` for linux32, > but

Re: HTML-based chrome and

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 10:11:19AM +, Benjamin Francis wrote: > On 27 February 2016 at 03:07, Myk Melez wrote: > > > Nevertheless, the more significant factor is that this would be a cultural > > sea change in the Gecko project. > > > > Eh? I didn't realise it was so

Re: Status Notifications for New Bugs in DOM, DevTools, and Hello

Actually, as I'm trying this, it's going to be noisy for anyone listening for bugmails, so I am going to send those triage decision emails from the bugmas...@mozilla.com address for the time being and work with the bmo team to get that feature put together sooner rather than later. -- Emma On

Re: Status Notifications for New Bugs in DOM, DevTools, and Hello

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Josh Matthews wrote: > Am I right in assuming that this is a comment that's added to the bug when > a triage decision is made, rather than as a direct response to filing the > bug? ​Yes, for now it's a comment (so we can trigger

Re: Status Notifications for New Bugs in DOM, DevTools, and Hello

This sounds like it could be useful, but I'm confused by some of the wording. The template wiki page describes this as a comment added to the bug, while this message describes it as an email directed at the bug filer. The wording also doesn't make it clear whether this applies to bugs that are

Status Notifications for New Bugs in DOM, DevTools, and Hello

Recently, Benjamin Smedberg gave an airmozilla talk in Mountain View [1] about improving how we handle bugs filed against Firefox, and how we hope it will make our product, the Web, and our lives better. Today, we’re ready to show you the next steps of that project. With the help of dedicated

Re: Exit code -11 must die

>On 2/27/2016 9:06 PM, Randell Jesup wrote: >> months until recently it popped up a bit). Note that this failure >> *never* results in a crashdump, and I've never seen it locally, just in >> Automation. > >What we do know: > > * Exit code -11 is evidence a SIGSEGV (crash). > >This I don't know,

Re: Exit code -11 must die

On 29/02/16 12:03 PM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote: On 2/27/2016 9:06 PM, Randell Jesup wrote: months until recently it popped up a bit). Note that this failure *never* results in a crashdump, and I've never seen it locally, just in Automation. What we do know: * Exit code -11 is evidence a

Re: Test automation addons and signing

The decision not to enforce addon signing on trunk/aurora is not changing. But, to support running our automation with unsigned addons on trunk/aurora, but signed addons on beta/release, we would have to implement some pretty complex logic at the aurora -> beta uplift, and this is substantial

Re: Exit code -11 must die

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote: > On 2/27/2016 9:06 PM, Randell Jesup wrote: > >> months until recently it popped up a bit). Note that this failure >> *never* results in a crashdump, and I've never seen it locally, just in >> Automation. >> > >

Re: Exit code -11 must die

On 2/27/2016 9:06 PM, Randell Jesup wrote: months until recently it popped up a bit). Note that this failure *never* results in a crashdump, and I've never seen it locally, just in Automation. What we do know: * Exit code -11 is evidence a SIGSEGV (crash). This I don't know, but somebody

Re: APNG and Accept-Encoding

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 6:56 AM Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Anne van Kesteren > wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Mike Lawther > wrote: > >> I'm testing the water here :) Is this at all likely

Re: HTML-based chrome and

On 2016-02-26 5:52 PM, Fabrice Desré wrote: > On 02/26/2016 02:42 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > >>> Look at what you need to implement to get the simplest gecko based >>> product that builds with --enable-application=my_great_app and compare >>> it to the same project as an Electron app. >> >> I

Re: HTML-based chrome and

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Benjamin Francis wrote: > On 26 February 2016 at 21:26, Ehsan Akhgari > wrote: > > > Without intending to start a shadow discussion on top of what's already > > happening on the internal list (sadly), to answer your

Intent to implement and ship: fetch() cache control API

*Summary*: This API allows a web page to specify how the resources it fetches interact with the browser HTTP cache. *Bug*: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1120715 *Link to standard*: https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/ *Platform coverage*: All platforms *Estimated or target release*:

Re: HTML-based chrome and

On 26 February 2016 at 21:26, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > Without intending to start a shadow discussion on top of what's already > happening on the internal list (sadly), to answer your technical > question, the "platform"/Firefox point is a false dichotomy. As an >

[Firefox Desktop] Issues found: February 22nd to February 26th

Hi everyone, Here's the list of new issues found and filed by the Desktop Release QA team last week, *February 22 - February 26* (week 8). Additional details on the team's priorities last week, as well as the plans for the current week are available at:

Re: APNG and Accept-Encoding

On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Mike Lawther wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 6:56 AM Jonas Sicking wrote: >> >> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Anne van Kesteren >> wrote: >> > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Mike Lawther >> >