Re: Evaluating the performance of new features

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 6:52 PM, Vladan Djeric wrote: > > Definitely not intending to point you out here Vladan. However, it would be cool if we fixed our IndexedDB implementation rather than told our own dev

Re: Intent to implement and ship FormData on workers

On Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 6:41:53 PM UTC-8, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 1/29/15 5:10 PM, nsm.nik...@gmail.com wrote: > > Pref: I intend to hide this behind dom.fetch.enabled, which also controls > > the Fetch specification. > > May I ask why? This seems like a totally reasonable thing to ex

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: Web Application Security (WebAppSec) Working Group

Here are the comments I have so far on this charter, based on the thread. I'd note that this is a relatively large set of demands to make in the charter review stage at the AC, especially for a recharter of a WG that we're involved in. So it may come across to W3C staff as somewhat demanding. I'

Re: Intent to implement and ship extended FormData methods

On Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 6:39:22 PM UTC-8, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 1/29/15 4:56 PM, nsm.nik...@gmail.com wrote: > > The proposed patch does not add iterator support. > > Is there a bug tracking adding this? https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1127703 > > > https://xhr.spec.wh

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: Web Application Security (WebAppSec) Working Group

On Sunday 2015-01-18 21:00 -0800, Brian Smith wrote: > L. David Baron wrote: > > http://www.w3.org/2014/12/webappsec-charter-2015.html > > Please see the threads at > > [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webappsec/2014Nov/0179.html > [2] > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/mozill

Evaluating the performance of new features (plain text version)

(I forgot step 0, don't post HTML messages to a newsgroup ;)) Hi all, There are a lot of good tools available now for studying Firefox performance, and I think a lot of them are not well known, so I put together a list of steps to follow when evaluating the performance of your next Firefox featur

Evaluating the performance of new features

Hi all, There are a lot of good tools available now for studying Firefox performance, and I think a lot of them are not well known, so I put together a list of steps to follow when evaluating the performance of your next Firefox feature. 1. Make sure to test your feature on a low-end or mid-ra

Re: Intent to implement and ship FormData on workers

On 1/29/15 5:10 PM, nsm.nik...@gmail.com wrote: Pref: I intend to hide this behind dom.fetch.enabled, which also controls the Fetch specification. May I ask why? This seems like a totally reasonable thing to expose independently of Fetch, and might be good to have it in a release before Fet

Re: Intent to implement and ship extended FormData methods

On 1/29/15 4:56 PM, nsm.nik...@gmail.com wrote: The proposed patch does not add iterator support. Is there a bug tracking adding this? https://xhr.spec.whatwg.org/#interface-formdata I assume something defines what happens if you delete() while sending the formdata and that we implement wh

Re: HEADS-UP: Disabling Gecko Media Plugins on older Linux kernels (bug 1120045)

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 06:57:30AM +0900, Mike Hommey wrote: > So, in practice, because the h264 code is not sandboxed on some setups, > we're disabling it so that vp8, which is not sandboxed either, is used > instead. We have about the same amount of control over openh264 and > vp8 code bases. Wha

Re: gecko-dev and Git replication will be broken for a little while

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:31:35PM -0800, Gregory Szorc wrote: > The steps within my control to potentially fix this issue have been > postponed until at least tomorrow due to the Firefox Beta build today. > tl;dr is people don't want to take on additional risk changing repositories. > > I hate to

Re: HEADS-UP: Disabling Gecko Media Plugins on older Linux kernels (bug 1120045)

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 10:07:09AM -0800, Jed Davis wrote: > Short version: On desktop Linux systems too old to support seccomp-bpf > system call filtering[1], Gecko Media Plugins will be disabled; in > practice, this means OpenH264, which is used for H.264 video compression > in WebRTC. This will

Re: Intent to implement and ship FormData on workers

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Xidorn Quan wrote: > Personally, I don't think it needs to be hidden behind a pref. Given that > FormData has been exposed on window, and the usage is mostly identical, I > suggest it be shipped directly. > > - Xidorn > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 9:10 AM, wrote: >

Re: Intent to implement and ship FormData on workers

Personally, I don't think it needs to be hidden behind a pref. Given that FormData has been exposed on window, and the usage is mostly identical, I suggest it be shipped directly. - Xidorn On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 9:10 AM, wrote: > Summary: The FormData interface allows sending forms directly vi

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: Web Application Security (WebAppSec) Working Group

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 1:59 PM, L. David Baron wrote: > > Is this arguably a violation of the priority of constituencies principle? > > It seems like it may serve the site more than the user. > > Do you want to insist that it be removed from the charter, or is > this something you think should b

Intent to implement and ship FormData on workers

Summary: The FormData interface allows sending forms directly via XHR. It has previously been exposed on window. This intent is to expose it on workers and allow the same usage, i.e: - Creating FormData objects and adding string values or blobs to them - Sending FormData objects via a call to xhr

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: Web Application Security (WebAppSec) Working Group

On Thursday 2015-01-29 13:27 -0800, Eric Rescorla wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:56 PM, L. David Baron wrote: > > > On Friday 2015-01-16 09:58 +0100, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 12:53 AM, L. David Baron > > wrote: > > > > Please reply to this thread if you think t

Intent to implement and ship extended FormData methods

Summary: FormData[1] has been an append only interface since it was introduced. The WHATWG version of the XHR spec added several methods to has/get/set/delete on the entries and introduced iteration support. This puts it in the same class as URLSearchParams and Headers. The proposed patch does

Re: gecko-dev and Git replication will be broken for a little while

Thanks. Hopefully all will be back to normal soon. Best, -Ekr On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote: >> >>> The steps within my control to potentially fix this i

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: Web Application Security (WebAppSec) Working Group

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:56 PM, L. David Baron wrote: > On Friday 2015-01-16 09:58 +0100, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 12:53 AM, L. David Baron > wrote: > > > Please reply to this thread if you think there's something else we > > > should say, or if you think we should

Re: gecko-dev and Git replication will be broken for a little while

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote: > >> The steps within my control to potentially fix this issue have been >> postponed until at least tomorrow due to the Firefox Beta build today. >> tl;dr is people don't want to take

Re: gecko-dev and Git replication will be broken for a little while

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote: > The steps within my control to potentially fix this issue have been > postponed until at least tomorrow due to the Firefox Beta build today. > tl;dr is people don't want to take on additional risk changing > repositories. > > I hate to say

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: Web Application Security (WebAppSec) Working Group

On Friday 2015-01-16 09:58 +0100, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 12:53 AM, L. David Baron wrote: > > Please reply to this thread if you think there's something else we > > should say, or if you think we should support the charter. > > I think in general it's fine, but there's

Re: Memory management in C programs

On 2015/01/12 22:46, Philip Chee wrote: "" One large difference between C and most other programming languages is that in C, you have to handle memory yourself rather than having a garbage collector do it for you. Ensuring that memory is allocated at the correct moment is not very difficult (and

Re: gecko-dev and Git replication will be broken for a little while

The steps within my control to potentially fix this issue have been postponed until at least tomorrow due to the Firefox Beta build today. tl;dr is people don't want to take on additional risk changing repositories. I hate to say this, but people using Git for Gecko development will have to wait a

Web APIs documentation meeting Friday

Once again, we'll be holding our weekly Web APIs documentation meeting this upcoming Friday, January 30. The meeting begins at 10 AM PST and rarely lasts longer than 15-20 minutes. See http://bit.ly/APIdocsMDN to convert this time into your time zone. We welcome and encourage anyone interested in

Re: Reversely iterating nsTArray

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 10:59:48AM -0500, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > On 2015-01-27 9:24 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote: > >I asked a question in #developers that what is the best way to reversely > >iterating nsTArray, and there are some suggestions: > > > > uint32_t count = array.Length(); for (uint32_t i = le

Re: JS-Ctype IRC Room

On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 8:40:04 PM UTC-8, Philip Chee wrote: > On 20/01/2015 07:21, noitid...@gmail.com wrote: > > New irc room we're trying to establish. #jsctypes > > > > https://client00.chat.mibbit.com/?url=irc%3A%2F%2Firc.mozilla.org%2F%23jsctypes > > That's wrong. The correct link is

Re: JS-Ctype IRC Room

On Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 12:30:02 AM UTC-8, helpcrypto helpcrypto wrote: > Is there a maillist for jsctypes? Wouldn't that be better than an irc > channel? > > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 5:39 AM, Philip Chee wrote: > > > On 20/01/2015 07:21, noitid...@gmail.com wrote: > > > New irc room w

gecko-dev and Git replication will be broken for a little while

Git replication is currently broken due to a mistake of mine when mass closing branches earlier today. Don't expect restoration before 1200 PDT. Bug 927219. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/

Re: Visibility plan for document.registerElement (custom elements)

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 9:04 PM, James Burke wrote: > We use some custom elements inside the app, so cannot currently go > privileged. While it would be relatively straightforward for the app to > move away from using document.registerElement, I would prefer to just leave > it as-is if document.re