Re: How best to do async functions and XPCOM?

Also sprach Joshua Cranmer: > The problem with MozPromise is that it doesn't integrate well if you use > XPIDL interfaces, so you have this annoying issue that if you want to use > XPIDL integration, you have to use mozilla::dom::Promise, which is annoying > to use from C++. A third wrinkle, es

Re: Upcoming changes to hg.mozilla.org access

Also search Emilio Cobos Álvarez: > On 11/2/19 12:53 PM, Andreas Tolfsen wrote: >> Documentation changes have historically been well served by a “wiki >> editing”/micro adjustments approach. I wonder if there is anything >> we can do with Phabricator to ease review requireme

Re: Experimenting with JavaScript type safety in mozilla-central

+gtatum Also sprach Dave Townsend: > A first experiment towards understanding this has just landed ( > https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/1dd081553a3a). Specifically > Greg Tatum has added TypeScript type > annotations and configuration to the JavaSc

Re: Upcoming changes to hg.mozilla.org access

Also sprach Kim Moir: > On Nov 14, 2019, we intend to change the permissions associated > with Level 3 access to revoke direct push access to hg.mozilla.org > on mozilla-inbound, Several modules have a policy that changes to documentation, e.g. for https://firefox-source-docs.mozilla.org/, can be

Suggesting reviewers (was: Re: Using MozPhab without Arcanist)

Emilio and Emma brings up an important barrier to outside contribution here. Also sprach Emilio Cobos Álvarez: > On 10/23/19 10:24 PM, Emma Humphries wrote: >> Will this make it easier for non-staff contributors to get their change >> sets reviewed and landed? >> What else should we be doing for

Re: WebIDL Reviewers Group

Also sprach Martin Thomson: > Is there a documented process for setting up and > maintaining the alias? You can create new review groups by filing a bug under Phabricator :: Administration, like this: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1545155 Once created, you can add and rem

Re: Intent to Prototype: Have window.outerHeight/outerWidth lie and report the innerHeight/innerWidth

Also sprach David Teller: > Have you checked that we don't use it internally in Firefox to e.g. > position tooltip menus? If so, we may need workarounds for the UI > and possibly WebExtensions. Indeed, we rely on these properties extensively in both frontend and automation. It would be fine of c

Re: Enable cargo pipelining to speed up Firefox builds

Also sprach Nicholas Nethercote: > - Set the environment variable `CARGO_BUILD_PIPELINING=true`. And if you want to include it in your mozconfig I imagine you likely have to do something like this: mk_add_options 'export CARGO_BUILD_PIPELINING=true' _

Re: Duplicate dependency policy for Rust in mozilla-central?

Also sprach Xidorn Quan: > Should we have some kind of policy to address duplicate dependencies > in Gecko as well? Maybe I'm missing something but I don't think I'm > aware of any previous discussion about this. Deduplicating crate dependencies has so far been a mostly heroic undertaking done b

Re: Moving reviews to Phabricator

Also sprach Kim Moir: > Requiring Phabricator for code reviews will allow us to improve > code quality by running linters and static analysis tools automatically > on patches. It will also allow us to simplify and standardize our > engineering workflow by reducing the number of request queues tha

geckodriver enabled in local developer builds

We have been building geckodriver on TaskCluster for a year and a half, but it has so far not been enabled by default in local developer builds. With a change that landed yesterday, geckodriver is included in the default build configuration also for local developer builds. It will not be built if

Re: Some of the Phabricator review requests don't show up in Bugzilla dashboard

Also sprach Mike Hommey: > Also, for reviewers, be aware that phabricator reviews don't count > in the red counter on the top right of bugzilla, don't appear in > the associated drop-down menu, and don't appear in "My requests" > either. This is a bit surprising. I just discovered I had two revi

Re: PSA: pay attention when setting multiple reviewers in Phabricator

Also sprach Mark Côté: > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 11:37 AM, Andreas Tolfsen wrote: > >> Also sprach Andrew Halberstadt: >> >>> It might be worth investigating whether we can switch Phabricator's >>> default (so that multiple reviews are all blocking

Re: PSA: pay attention when setting multiple reviewers in Phabricator

Also sprach Andrew Halberstadt: > It might be worth investigating whether we can switch Phabricator's > default (so that multiple reviews are all blocking, and to make > them non-blocking would require the extra step). I agree with Andrew. Making the default “everyone explicitly marked as review

Re: PSA: pay attention when setting multiple reviewers in Phabricator

Also sprach Marco Bonardo: > When asking for review to multiple reviewers, and all of them must accept > your revision, you must mark them as blocking reviews, either in the > Phabricator ui or appending "!" at the end of the reviewer name. Otherwise > it's first-come-first-serve. Note that is an

Re: mozilla-inbound backout policy subject to change (become similar to autoland)

Also sprach Gregory Szorc: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 3:45 PM, Dave Townsend > wrote: > >> This doesn't seem to answer the question. I frequently do patches >> where I can't reliably guess the extent of test breakage and want >> to run a full set to be on the safe side. What try configuration >>

Fwd: WPT Developer Survey - June 2018

If you run, write, or work with Web Platform Tests (WPT) in some capacity, we would like to invite you to answer a short survey. The survey helps us identify ergonomic problems so that we can improve the tools for building an interoperable web platform. -- >8 -- > From: Simon Pieters > Subject:

Re: PSA: Setting preferences and extensions in test harnesses

Also sprach Andrew Halberstadt: > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 11:07 AM Andreas Tolfsen wrote: >> Any plans to consolidate the Mn preferences, currently stored in >> geckoinstance.py? > > Yes, but I don't have a timeline. I want to at least finish up > reftest

Re: PSA: Setting preferences and extensions in test harnesses

Also sprach Andrew Halberstadt: > tl;dr - You can now set prefs and install extensions across multiple > harnesses by modifying the relevant profile under testing/profiles. This seems like a good change. > # Further Work > > I'm in the middle of migrating harnesses over to this new system. > No

Re: PSA: Deprecating JS-Implemented WebIDL

Also sprach Bobby Holley: > For reasons outlined in bug 1450827, the DOM peers have decided to > deprecate support for JS-implemented WebIDL APIs. This means that > new additions of |JSImplementation="foo"| are no longer permitted. Out of curiosity, and mostly because my knowledge of how this wo

Re: Editing a vendored crate for a try push

Also sprach Henri Sivonen: > What's the current status of tooling for editing vendored crates for > local testing and try pushes? > > It looks like our toml setup is too complex for cargo edit-locally to > handle (or, alternatively, I'm holding it wrong). It also seems that > mach edit-crate neve

Re: PSA: Chrome-only WebIDL interfaces no longer require DOM peer review

Also sprach Myk Melez: > For example, XPCOM supports component registration and overriding > at runtime. But it isn't clear that Firefox needs those features, > now that it no longer supports XUL extensions (unless perhaps for > system extensions). I believe this is a feature we rely on for bypas

Re: Intent to implement and ship navigator.webdriver

Also sprach Andreas Tolfsen: > Summary: > I intend to implement and ship a new enumerable, configurable, > read-only "webdriver" attribute on the Navigator object. The > attribute is true when the -marionette flag is passed to Firefox > or the marionette.enabled preferen

Re: Intent to implement and ship navigator.webdriver

Also sprach Martin Thomson: > On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 3:37 AM, Andreas Tolfsen wrote: >> Motivation: >> To give web authors a way to infer if user agent is controlled by >> automation, so the document can take alternate code paths when under >> test. > > Can y

Re: Intent to implement and ship navigator.webdriver

Also sprach Boris Zbarsky: > And in particular, the implementation patches don't match the intent > description (e.g. we implement a configurable property) Making it unforgeable is obviously a rather bad idea. I did mean that the attribute is _configurable_. _

Re: Intent to implement and ship navigator.webdriver

Also sprach Boris Zbarsky: > On 2/5/18 11:37 AM, Andreas Tolfsen wrote: >> Standard: >> https://w3c.github.io/webdriver/webdriver-spec.html#interface > > All the IDL snippets in this standard are empty, which makes it > hard to evaluate the standard or how our impleme

Intent to implement and ship navigator.webdriver

Summary: I intend to implement and ship a new enumerable, non-configurable, read-only "webdriver" attribute on the Navigator object. The attribute is true when the -marionette flag is passed to Firefox or the marionette.enabled preference is true. Otherwise it is false. Motivation: To give web a

Re: Next year in web-platform-tests

Also sprach smaug: > On 12/15/2017 05:38 PM, James Graham wrote: >> In particular it would help to hear about things that you would >> consider blockers to removing tests from non-wpt suites that are >> duplicated in wpt (assuming exact duplication), and limitations >> either in the capabilities o

Re: Phabricator/Lando update, November 2017

Also sprach Mark Côté: > We were hesitant to advertise this too widely in order not to create > any confusion around the Quantum release, but now that that has > settled down I am told it should be fine for anyone to start using > it. The instance is at https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/ >

Re: Intent to require Python 3 to build Firefox 59 and later

Also sprach Gregory Szorc: The requirement will likely be Python 3.5+. Although I would love to make that 3.6 if possible so we can fully harness modern features and performance. Hold your horses with 3.6. Only Python 3.5.3 is at the time of writing available in the most common Linux distribu

Re: Building mozilla-central with clang + icecream

Also sprach p...@paul.cx: I'm using this setup daily (with clang trunk from some weeks ago, not 5.0, but it's the same really), here is my mozconfig: ``` export CC="icecc clang" export CXX="icecc clang++" mk_add_options MOZ_MAKE_FLAGS="-j100" # adjust, this is good for the paris office mk_add_o

Re: Reviews for in-tree documentation (was: Builds docs on MDN)

Also sprach Sylvestre Ledru: By the way, do we know how many mdn contributions are made on these pages by people who are not regular Firefox developers? A push in-tree requires permissions, which isn't a small barrier, might impact that (not mentioning the size of the repo). If this is only a

Reviews for in-tree documentation (was: Builds docs on MDN)

Some time ago there was a discussion on dev-builds@ regarding the state of our in-tree source code documentation. The main focus was that MDN, moving forward, will mainly revolve around web platform documentation and would actively start de-emphasising Gecko contribution docs. Now, that discussi

Re: Experimenting with a shared review queue for Core::Build Config

Also sprach smaug: How did the setup actually work? I think farre gave a satisfactory summary of the review tool above. I've asked this from farre too before, and IIRC, the reply was that is wasn't working that well. Certain devs still ended up doing majority of the reviews. But perhaps I m

Re: Experimenting with a shared review queue for Core::Build Config

+tools-marionette Also sprach Chris Cooper: Many of the build peers have long review queues. I'm not convinced that all of the review requests going to any particular build peer need to be exclusive. I think it is great that you’re experimenting with this, and I’m very excited about it! In a

Re: Shipping Headless Firefox on Linux

Also sprach Dan Mosedale: 2017-06-16 6:22 GMT-07:00 Ehsan Akhgari : On 06/15/2017 04:37 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote: Would it be feasible to use headless mode for mochitests (or reftests, etc. etc.)? Running the tests that we rely on for correctness on an environment that looks this different t

Re: Shipping Headless Firefox on Linux

Also sprach Ehsan Akhgari: On 06/15/2017 04:37 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote: Would it be feasible to use headless mode for mochitests (or reftests, etc. etc.)? Running the tests that we rely on for correctness on an environment that looks this different than the environment that our users run soun

Re: e10s-multi update and tests

Also sprach Blake Kaplan : > As part of our effort to enable e10s-multi on Nightly, we disabled > a few tests that were misbehaving. We've re-enabled most of them > and are on track to finish re-enabling them (after verifying that > the problem was in the test and not the underlying code). Do you

Re: Sheriff Highlights and Summary in February 2017

Also sprach Andrew Halberstadt : > I don't have any data to back this up, but my suspicion is that a > large percentage of backouts had try runs, but said try runs > didn't run the jobs that failed and caused the backout. I ascribe to this explanation. This has happened to me a few times because

Re: Reorganization of Firefox-UI tests in mozilla-central

Henrik Skupin writes: > Do those locations sound good? I have heard at least once that > "firefox_ui" might not be the best choice as folder name, but that's > how the harness is called, and corresponds to what we have for other > harnesses too. I would suggest s/firefox_ui/ui/g, or to eliminate

Re: New: Use Marionette on Firefox for Android (Fennec)

James Willcox writes: > I guess there's not currently an easy way to enable Marionette for > non-debug builds? You can set the ENABLE_MARIONETTE output variable to something exciting in your mozconfig to enable it in optimised builds. > One thing I looked into before was using ChromeDriver and

Re: Rust code in mozilla-central now builds via cargo

Nathan, Nathan Froyd writes: > TL; DR: Bug 1231764 has landed on mozilla-central; the build system > now invokes cargo to build all the Rust code in m-c. This should > result in a better Rust developer experience, as well as making it > easier to import Rust libraries into m-c. This is great,

Re: MXR permanently offline, please transition to DXR

Erik Rose writes: > > Simple question: How often is DXR refreshed from, say, > > mozilla-central. > > Every 6 hours. However, if it doesn't build successfully, it doesn't > update (since DXR uses information exfiltrated from the compiler to > give more accurate search results than MXR). Is thi

Re: Try syntax is no longer required when pushing to try

On 3 March 2016 at 17:25, Andrew Halberstadt wrote: > With treeherder's "Add New Jobs" [1] UI, using try syntax is no longer > the only way to schedule stuff on try. As of now, it's possible to push > to try without any try syntax. If you do this, no jobs will be scheduled > on your push and it wi

Re: Proposing preferring Clang over GCC for developer buidls

On 3 March 2016 at 00:13, Martin Thomson wrote: > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Mike Hommey wrote: >> More importantly, changing the official toolchain has implications on >> performance. > > Without any real evidence for this, I'm told that GCC still produces > better (i.e., faster) output.

Re: rr chaos mode update

On 16 February 2016 at 16:38, Nick Fitzgerald wrote: > It seems like try/tbpl could automatically detect new test files and run > them N times. That way, the developer doesn't have to do it manually, so it > is less "intimidating" and also less likely to be skipped by accident or > forgotten. We

Re: Requiring a try job prior to autolanding to inbound

Overall I think this idea makes sense. Is it your intention that the try run should be 100% complete, or just that one exists and is associated with the review? In some cases I find myself invoking Autoland when I feel reasonably confident about the results. On 22 January 2016 at 12:12, Daniel M

Re: Taking screenshots of single elements (XUL/XULRunner)

On 19 January 2016 at 11:22, Ted Mielczarek wrote: > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016, at 01:39 AM, m.bauermeis...@sto.com wrote: >> As part of my work on a prototyping suite I'd like to take screenshots >> (preferably retaining the alpha channel) of single UI elements. I'd like >> to do so on an onclick even

Re: Dynamic Logging

On 9 January 2016 at 04:06, Philip Chee wrote: > On 09/01/2016 09:50, Mike Hommey wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 05:32:48PM -0800, Eric Rahm wrote: >>> There is one caveat: if you don't use LazyLogModule and friends, >>> you don't get dynamic logging. So go update your loggers! >> >> I now wish

Re: Now measuring Firefox size per-commit. What else should we be tracking?

On 9 November 2015 at 18:39, William Lachance wrote: > Chris Manchester has volunteered to look into submitting build times in > automation to perfherder here: > > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1222549 Another thing it might be interesting to look at is ccache utilisation over time

Re: Now measuring Firefox size per-commit. What else should we be tracking?

On 4 November 2015 at 15:55, William Lachance wrote: > Is there anything we could be tracking as part of our build or test jobs > that we should be? Build times are one thing that immediately comes to mind. Measuring build time would almost certainly be of big value, because it has a tendency to

Re: layers.async-pan-zoom.enabled amazing performance increase

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:15 AM wrote: > Problem it this introduced some bugs, like disabling scrolling completely > on some pages, such as a google search page. > Did you report a bug on this yet? I find this can be reproduced reliably by loading in more log history in an application like IRC

Re: [feature] open certain domains into a private window

On 23 Jun 2015, at 20:24, Karl Dubost wrote: > Le 23 juin 2015 à 19:16, Eric Shepherd a écrit : >> I thought we had an "open in new private window" option when right clicking >> links. Not a total solution but helps. > > My "I'm reading an email with a link to Google Doc" was assuming an email

Re: Replacing Mozmill driven tests for Firefox with Marionette

On 13 May 2015, at 04:40, Philip Chee wrote: > On 12/05/2015 20:23, Henrik Skupin wrote: >> To being able to better spread work around we basically >> have chosen the wider known Marionette framework. > > Thunderbird currently uses mozmill. Will Marionette[1] be available for > Thunderbird? Is th

Re: Screen Capture

I think it would be useful to distinguish between a one-off screenshot and screen sharing/streaming here. On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Jet Villegas wrote: > 1. Web-facing or not? Both. Perhaps with different security models. > 2. Security/Privacy concerns Many. If granting permission to

Re: Is XPath still a thing?

On 15/04/2014 14:33, Gijs Kruitbosch wrote: On 15/04/2014 14:21, Andreas Tolfsen wrote: On 15/04/2014 11:17, Anne van Kesteren wrote: It would be interesting to know what they use it for and why querySelector() et al don't meet their needs, but there's no immediate threat of what we

Re: Is XPath still a thing?

On 15/04/2014 11:17, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 10:54 PM, Jorge Villalobos wrote: FWIW, many add-ons use XPath. If there's anything we should be recommending add-on developers to migrate to, please let me know. It would be interesting to know what they use it for and why