Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-11 Thread Martin Thomson
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Byron Jones wrote: > instead of disabling splinter for phabricator backed products, we could make > it a read-only patch viewer. Given the number of bugs that exist with patches attached, that would be greatly appreciated. I would also assume

Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-11 Thread Byron Jones
To answer the other part of your question, MozReview will be disabled for active use across the board, but it is currently used by a small number of projects. Splinter will be disabled on a per-product basis, as there may be some projects that can't, won't, or shouldn't be migrated to

Re: Bulk Closing Intermittents

2017-07-11 Thread Karl Tomlinson
I assume this was integrated with OrangeFactor? That is the only way I know to determine whether an intermittent failure has occurred, because failures are not necessarily reported to bugzilla. Is there a mechanism for tracking a failure that we intend to addresss, even when it does not fail

Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-11 Thread Mike Hommey
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 09:59:57PM -0400, Mark Côté wrote: > On 2017-07-11 9:51 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 6:41 AM, Mark Côté wrote: > > > * MozReview and Splinter turned off in early December. > > > > Is this bugzilla-wide? I know that other

Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-11 Thread Mark Côté
On 2017-07-11 9:51 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 6:41 AM, Mark Côté wrote: * MozReview and Splinter turned off in early December. Is this bugzilla-wide? I know that other project use splinter still. Will those projects be able to use phabricator for

Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-11 Thread Martin Thomson
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 6:41 AM, Mark Côté wrote: > * MozReview and Splinter turned off in early December. Is this bugzilla-wide? I know that other project use splinter still. Will those projects be able to use phabricator for their projects? For instance, NSS uses a

Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-11 Thread Mark Côté
We're currently trying to figure that out. It's unlikely that it will be available for the initial launch of Phabricator, but we hope to have it not too long after. I'll have an update in a couple weeks. Mark On 2017-07-11 7:32 PM, Chris Pearce wrote: What is the status of push-to-review

Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-11 Thread Chris Pearce
What is the status of push-to-review support? Chris. On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 8:42:06 AM UTC+12, Mark Côté wrote: > Hi all, here's a brief update on the project to deploy and integrate > Phabricator at Mozilla: > > * Development Phabricator instance is up at >

Re: More Rust code

2017-07-11 Thread Mike Hommey
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 08:05:05AM +0900, Brian Birtles wrote: > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:34 PM, Jim Mathies wrote: > > > What's the debugging situation look like for Windows developers? I've heard > > it's pretty painful. Can we step through rust code using common tools

Re: More Rust code

2017-07-11 Thread Brian Birtles
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:34 PM, Jim Mathies wrote: > What's the debugging situation look like for Windows developers? I've heard > it's pretty painful. Can we step through rust code using common tools > (WinDBG/Visual Studio)? > You can set breakpoints and step through

Re: W3C Charter Advance Notice: Web Platform (recharter) & Service Workers WGs

2017-07-11 Thread L. David Baron
On Wednesday 2017-07-05 20:58 -0700, Marcos Caceres wrote: > On July 6, 2017 at 1:40:13 PM, L. David Baron (dba...@dbaron.org) wrote: > > I've taken what you (Tantek) wrote and made minor changes to yield > > the following Formal Objection to the Web Platform WG charter. > > I support the updated

Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-11 Thread Mark Côté
Hi all, here's a brief update on the project to deploy and integrate Phabricator at Mozilla: * Development Phabricator instance is up at https://mozphab.dev.mozaws.net/, authenticated via bugzilla-dev.allizom.org. * Development, read-only UI for Lando (the new automatic-landing service) has

Re: W3C Charter Advance Notice: Web Platform (recharter) & Service Workers WGs

2017-07-11 Thread Ben Kelly
We have implementation close to review for one-shot sync. I don't know of any browser that has implemented and shipped periodic sync yet. On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 2:49 PM, L. David Baron wrote: > On Tuesday 2017-07-11 11:38 -0700, L. David Baron wrote: > > On Wednesday

Re: W3C Charter Advance Notice: Web Platform (recharter) & Service Workers WGs

2017-07-11 Thread L. David Baron
On Tuesday 2017-07-11 11:38 -0700, L. David Baron wrote: > On Wednesday 2017-07-05 11:02 -0700, L. David Baron wrote: > > On Friday 2017-05-12 15:58 -0700, L. David Baron wrote: > > > The W3C gave advance notice that 2 new charters are under > > > development: > > > > > >

Re: W3C Charter Advance Notice: Web Platform (recharter) & Service Workers WGs

2017-07-11 Thread L. David Baron
On Wednesday 2017-07-05 11:02 -0700, L. David Baron wrote: > On Friday 2017-05-12 15:58 -0700, L. David Baron wrote: > > The W3C gave advance notice that 2 new charters are under > > development: > > > > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2017May/0006.html > > (which

Proposed W3C Charter: WebVR Working Group

2017-07-11 Thread L. David Baron
The W3C is proposing a new charter for: WebVR Working Group https://www.w3.org/2017/07/vr-wg-charter.html https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2017Jul/0002.html Mozilla has the opportunity to send support, comments, or objections through Friday, August 18. If this is work

Re: More Rust code

2017-07-11 Thread Nicolas B. Pierron
On 07/11/2017 03:46 PM, Nicolas B. Pierron wrote: (Answering privately until I get more manager intent to get this project as part of any long term roadmap) Or not so privately after all … :( -- Nicolas B. Pierron ___ dev-platform mailing list

RE: More Rust code

2017-07-11 Thread Jim Mathies
What's the debugging situation look like for Windows developers? I've heard it's pretty painful. Can we step through rust code using common tools (WinDBG/Visual Studio)? Jim -Original Message- From: dev-platform [mailto:dev-platform-bounces+jmathies=mozilla@lists.mozilla.org] On

Re: More Rust code

2017-07-11 Thread smaug
On 07/11/2017 04:27 PM, Ben Kelly wrote: On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: If I were the owner of that module I would consider implementing a policy something

Re: More Rust code

2017-07-11 Thread Alexis Beingessner
I'm currently trying to improve the C++ <-> Rust FFI story a bit. I just posted a draft proposal to add a mode to rustc that has it output the ABI details of all public types: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/stabilizing-a-machine-readable-zprint-type-sizes/5525 This would theoretically reduce

Re: More Rust code

2017-07-11 Thread smaug
On 07/10/2017 01:29 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: Hi, Firefox now has multiple Rust components, and it's on track to get a bunch more. See https://wiki.mozilla.org/Oxidation for details. I think this is an excellent trend, and I've been thinking about how to accelerate it. Here's a

Re: More Rust code

2017-07-11 Thread Ben Kelly
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Bobby Holley > wrote: > > > If I were the owner of that module I would consider implementing a policy > >> something like the following: > >> > >>

Re: More Rust code

2017-07-11 Thread Joshua Cranmer 
On 7/10/17 5:29 AM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: - Interop with existing components can be difficult. IPDL codegen rust bindings could be a big help. Rust's C++ interop story is absolutely atrocious. The FFI basically runs on C ABI, even though Rust and C++ have some similar concepts that could

Re: More Rust code

2017-07-11 Thread Gabor Krizsanits
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Kris Maglione wrote: > Combined with the fact that I would have needed to find and dig through > various scattered mailing list posts and wiki pages, and then pester a > bunch of people by email or IRC just to get started, I've always given

Re: More Rust code

2017-07-11 Thread Nicholas Nethercote
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Bobby Holley wrote: > If I were the owner of that module I would consider implementing a policy >> something like the following: >> >> "When a person writes a new compiled-code component, or majorly rewrites >> an existing one, they should

Re: More Rust code

2017-07-11 Thread Julien Cristau
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Chris Peterson wrote: > On 7/10/17 4:48 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote: > >> The first thing comes to my mind is crash reports. It currently doesn't >> always include useful panic message from Rust, see for example [1] and [2]. >> Also for Stylo, we

Re: Proposed W3C Charter: WebAssembly Working Group

2017-07-11 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 3:29 AM, L. David Baron wrote: > The standard sentence: > "Most WebAssembly Working Group teleconferences will focus on > discussion of particular specifications, and will be conducted on an > as-needed basis." > doesn't seem to make sense for a