Is there somewhere to get a report of new test failures from a web-platform-tests sync?

Hi, Today I was digging through the test expectations in web-platform-tests/meta and came across some failure annotations for tests added to w-p-t by Blink engineers that were since synced to m-c. Looking into them, one of them turned out to be a real bug in our code.[1] Apart from being stoked

Do we need to run web-platform-tests --manifest-update when touching existing tests?

Hi, It seems like the MANIFEST.json for web platform tests now includes a checksum of test file contents. As a result, if you run './mach web-platform-tests --manifest-update yer' on a clean checkout of m-c you're likely to get a bunch of changes to MANIFEST.json showing up. Should we be

Re: Intent to implement and ship: only allow Flash on HTTP/HTTPS sites

在 2017/2/10 1:28, Benjamin Smedberg 写道: On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 2:26 AM, 段垚 wrote: Is this just preventing auto-loading (like "click to play") or completely disable Flash for non-http(s) contents? This is completely disabling this content. Can users get back old

Re: Intent to implement: CSS text-justify property

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017, at 12:33 AM, Patrick Brosset wrote: > > > > DevTools bug: It's not yet clear to me whether specific DevTools work will > > be needed. > > > > I don't think we need anything now, the property should work in the > inspector's Rules panel just like other properties. > Although

Re: Intent to implement and ship: only allow Flash on HTTP/HTTPS sites

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017, at 04:29 AM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote: > Will this also prevent loading downloaded .swf files into Firefox? This > is > > useful for running Flash games, which tend to work best in the browser > > (some media players also support loading Flash files, but their hotkeys > > tend

Re: test

Sorry for the noisy... It was meant to test whether the mailing list works again... But I picked the wrong email address so it got published. Please ignore this one. - Xidorn On Fri, Feb 10, 2017, at 01:44 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote: > This is for testing purpose, and should not be published to the

test

This is for testing purpose, and should not be published to the list. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Changing the representation of rectangles in platform code

My concern is that this will get partially done but never completed, and we'll end up in a situation where we have two styles in place. We have a bad track record with that sort of thing. Nick On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 1:45 PM, Jeff Muizelaar wrote: > It's not very easy to

Re: FYI: We've forked the Breakpad client code

On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 12:41:07PM -0800, Jim Blandy wrote: > Under the circumstances, I'll volunteer to review, if that's feasible. I can too. > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Ted Mielczarek wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017, at 02:47 PM, Aaron Klotz wrote: > > > This is

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: FYI: We've forked the Breakpad client code

Under the circumstances, I'll volunteer to review, if that's feasible. On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Ted Mielczarek wrote: > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017, at 02:47 PM, Aaron Klotz wrote: > > This is great news, Ted! > > > > Are you going to be creating a module for this? Who are

Re: FYI: We've forked the Breakpad client code

On Thu, Feb 9, 2017, at 02:47 PM, Aaron Klotz wrote: > This is great news, Ted! > > Are you going to be creating a module for this? Who are the peers? I don't think a new module is necessary, we've covered the existing integration code (nsExceptionHandler.cpp etc) under the Toolkit module for a

Re: FYI: We've forked the Breakpad client code

This is great news, Ted! Are you going to be creating a module for this? Who are the peers? -Aaron ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

FYI: We've forked the Breakpad client code

FYI, I landed a patch[1] yesterday that forked the Breakpad client code. Everything that was in toolkit/crashreporter/google-breakpad/src/client is now in toolkit/crashreporter/breakpad-client. Google has switched Chromium to using Crashpad (their new crash reporting library) on Windows, OS X and

Re: Intent to implement and ship: self.origin

On 2/9/17 5:45 AM, Mike West wrote: I look forward to stealing your tests. :) Yep, sounds good. I put up patches in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1306170 with the test bits; in fact most of the patches are changes to the tests. Note that you'll want

Re: Intent to implement and ship: document.origin

On 2/9/17 5:44 AM, Mike West wrote: Perhaps we could deprecate `document.origin` and ship `self.origin` in Blink instead of y'all shipping `document.origin`? It seems like we want to encourage folks to use `self.origin` going forward... So specifically, should I be asking Anne to remove

Re: Intent to implement and ship: only allow Flash on HTTP/HTTPS sites

On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Chris Peterson wrote: > On 2/7/2017 1:15 PM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote: > >> I intend to ship a change which will prevent Flash from loading from >> file:, >> ftp:, or any other URL scheme other than http: or https:. The purpose of >> this

Re: Intent to implement and ship: only allow Flash on HTTP/HTTPS sites

Will this also prevent loading downloaded .swf files into Firefox? This is > useful for running Flash games, which tend to work best in the browser > (some media players also support loading Flash files, but their hotkeys > tend to conflict). It will prevent them from loading via File > Open,

Re: Intent to implement and ship: only allow Flash on HTTP/HTTPS sites

On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 2:26 AM, 段垚 wrote: > Is this just preventing auto-loading (like "click to play") or completely > disable Flash for non-http(s) contents? > This is completely disabling this content. > > Can users get back old behavior by flipping a preference? > That

Re: Intent to implement and ship: document.origin

On 2/9/17 5:44 AM, Mike West wrote: Perhaps we could deprecate `document.origin` and ship `self.origin` in Blink instead of y'all shipping `document.origin`? Given the lack of support in Edge and the incompatible support in WebKit, I can probably live with that. Especially if y'all remove it

Re: Changing the representation of rectangles in platform code

It's not very easy to reason about overflow issues with our current representation. This means that we currently just pretend that they don't happen. The idea for changing the representation came up in response to a security bug where we didn't really have a better solution. Changing to x1, x2,

Re: Intent to disable service workers and push in 52 ESR

I just filed: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1338144 On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 4:26 AM, Kohei Yoshino wrote: > Do we already have a bug for this? Firefox 52 will be shipped just in 4 > weeks. > > > On 2017-01-18 10:49 AM, Ben Kelly wrote: > >> I'd like to

Re: Intent to implement: CSS text-justify property

> > DevTools bug: It's not yet clear to me whether specific DevTools work will > be needed. > I don't think we need anything now, the property should work in the inspector's Rules panel just like other properties. Although we might want to keep that in mind for a future version of our Fonts

Re: Intent to disable service workers and push in 52 ESR

Do we already have a bug for this? Firefox 52 will be shipped just in 4 weeks. On 2017-01-18 10:49 AM, Ben Kelly wrote: I'd like to disable service workers in 52 ESR. This would also require disabling push notifications. A year ago we decided to disable service workers in 45 ESR because it