Hi All,
Recently Geoff Brown landed an AWSY-like system [1] for tracking memory
usage on Perfherder. This is awesome. It's one of my pinned tabs.
I was happy to see two recent "drops" in memory usage:
1. A ~3% drop in "Resident Memory Tabs closed [+30s]", likely due to Bug
990916 which expires
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Adam Roach wrote:
> On 1/22/16 06:12, Daniel Minor wrote:
>
>> Another difference is that sheriffs require a try run before they will
>> land
>> a patch flagged "checkin-needed." In Bug 1239281 we're proposing to
>> implement this requirement
Awesome! Thanks to the team that made this happen.
(CC'ing dev-mobile-firefox too)
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Kartikaya Gupta
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Just a heads up that I landed the patch to enable APZ on Fennec
> (nightly channel only for now). It should be in the
I also think measuring build times, and other build related stats, would be
useful. I'd like to see Mozilla capturing those stats for developer builds
though. I'm less interested in build times for the automation. That data is
already looked at by the automation team.
Build stats for developers
Valid point
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 9:22 AM, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
Mark Finkle schrieb:
and maybe we should use it
for the FHR persistent ID since it's the same across installs and
profile-resets
I think it's a *very* bad idea privacy-wise to use the same ID across
We wanted to start some transparency around a new integration coming to
Firefox on Mobile [1]. We are planning to integrate a 3rd party install
tracking SDK from a company called Adjust [2] which will send data,
possibly device identity data [3], to a 3rd party server. We don't do this
very much
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 2:49 PM, kgu...@mozilla.com wrote:
It seems to me that when doing something as privacy sensitive as this we
should probably figure out exactly what data we want to collect *first*.
Then, if and only if we can't collect it using in-house code, we should
consider going
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 2:49 PM, kgu...@mozilla.com wrote:
On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 at 2:29:32 PM UTC-4, Mark Finkle wrote:
There are good reasons for wanting to collect the data. Our marketing and
growth goals for 2015 will require spending non-trivial amounts of money.
The data
- Original Message -
On 11/26/14 6:55 PM, Philip Chee wrote:
On 27/11/2014 00:03, Gregory Szorc wrote:
Yes, people on this list generally care about C++. However, there is
a very large group - most of the Firefox Team and a large amount of
Firefox OS developers - who don't. To
Fennec/Android does have the ability to run xpcshell-like tests. These tests
are JS scripts loaded into a framework that simulates the xpcshell system.
Technically it's not xpcshell though. The JS script is loaded into tab of the
Fennec browser. If the JS script knows this, it can create a
- Original Message -
When you say intent to implement what is it you're planning on
implementing?
* web activities between b2g-style webapps on Android
Yes
* web activities called by sites loaded in the Firefox for Android browser?
* web activities provided by sites loaded in the
- Original Message -
I don't know. Maybe building an SDK based on Firefox is the right
thing; honestly, I just want something that works. But I put a lot of
effort into this over the last two years.
FWIW, I packaged xulrunner in Debian in 2006 and have been maintaining
it since
Your proposal sounds somewhat similar to the way the webapprt is being
delivered too. I think that's a good thing.
- Original Message -
I propose that we just stop pretending, and terminate xulrunner,
considering the following:
- Xulrunner is lagging behind Firefox: DLL block list,
One reason I've seen 2 preferred to 4 (apart from keeping line lengths
down) is that:
if (somethingHere()
somethingElse())
doSomething();
is less clear about what's condition and what's body the if body is than:
if (somethingHere()
somethingElse())
doSomething();
Changing the line
Agreed. In /mobile JS code we favor wrapping 80 characters. 100 seems
reasonable to me.
- Original Message -
I strongly prefer at least a 100 character per line limit. Technology
marches on.
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Karl Tomlinson mozn...@karlt.net wrote:
L. David Baron
Couldn't the add-on hotfix approach be used for some of these items?
- Original Message -
On 12/07/13 18:20, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
I think the general concept of making more of our lists be dynamic is
sound, but I'm very skeptical of the technical solution that you appear
to
I've described the various defines here:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/**Platform/Channel-specific_**build_defineshttps://wiki.mozilla.org/Platform/Channel-specific_build_defines
My understanding of this is that we were going to limit use of all
of
these options to control
On 08/29/2012 09:54 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Ehsan Akhgari ehsan.akhg...@gmail.comwrote:
I agree with that if we talk about performance in general. But this
thread is about specific regressions in performance as a result of
changeset going into our tree.
On 08/29/2012 07:32 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
In my experience, a lot of those emails say there was a regression
caused by one of the following 100 patches, and I will have written 1
of those patches. I usually ignore those ones (though it depends on
the nature of the patch).
But if
19 matches
Mail list logo