Not blocking on UX decisions

Hi folks, We’re all pretty overloaded these days and so, sometimes, it can be hard to get even a small moment of help from a different team when you’re trying to solve a problem. One example of this is when fixing a bug requires changing a small piece of UI and, ideally, you might want to get UX

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

ut not > > long-term usage. Unfortunately I can't settle for a proposal like "allow > it > > only in debug or only in nightlies" because I often need to debug actual > > user-facing builds. Is there any way we could build some auto-expiration > > into this setting,

Re: Proposal: remove support for running desktop Firefox in single-process mode (e10s disabled) anywhere but in tests

Non-e10s is such a different environment that I don't think we have any hope of keeping it working without running the full test suite in that mode and I don't think anyone wants to do that. Now that this has started breaking I think it is actively harmful to our users for us to allow them to

Re: Testing Rust code in tree

Aha, someone has pointed out that I skipped over rusttests, which don't appear to be listed at https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/QA/Automated_testing, or indeed anywhere in our various docs that I can see. I guess that makes it my job? On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 3:37 PM Dave Townsend

Testing Rust code in tree

Do we have any standard way to test in-tree Rust code? Context: We're building a standalone binary in Rust that in the future will be distributed with Firefox and of course we want to test it. It lives in-tree and while we could use something like xpcshell to drive the produced executable and

Re: Intent to Implement and Ship: Make MOZ_QUIET the default, require opt-in for DOMWINDOW/DOCSHELL logs

Thank you for doing this. On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 2:44 PM Tom Ritter wrote: > In https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1592297 I plan/hope to > remove MOZ_QUIET and turn off the DOCSHELL/DOMWINDOW logging by default. > It will automatically be enabled in browser-chrome tests where it is >

Experimenting with JavaScript type safety in mozilla-central

JavaScript powers a lot of Firefox but unlike the other languages that ship code in our product JavaScript uses a dynamic type system. Types for variables are decided at execution time and can change as new values are assigned to them. This leaves you open to accidentally passing the wrong kind of

Re: The sec-approval process makes users safer

On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 6:01 PM Jeff Walden wrote: > Those of you longer in the tooth may remember Firefox was successfully > exploited in Pwn2own 2012...and we didn't have to lift a finger to fix it. > We already had -- in the Firefox release shipping days later. 臘 > >

Re: Must we rebuild all our rust code constantly?

Thanks to a tip I've tracked this down. This seems to only be the case when I have sccache enabled. Disabling it gives me nice quick incremental builds again. Of course that isn't an ideal solution but it will do for now. On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 1:55 PM Dave Townsend wrote: > For a cou

Must we rebuild all our rust code constantly?

For a couple of weeks now I've seen that any attempt to build Firefox, even incremental builds seem to rebuild an awful lot of rust code. I found this in the source which seems to suggest why: https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/config/makefiles/rust.mk#238. But, this means that now an

Please watch your character encodings

(If you don't know much about character encodings and how they can cause issues I just posted the blog post for you: https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2019/07/Please-watch-your-character-encodings ) I've run into a few bugs recently where non-english characters were causing things to break

Re: Upcoming changes to our JS coding style

Prettier will share eslint's list of things to ignore and those tests are already ignored: https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/1133b6716d9a8131c09754f3f29288484896b8b6/.eslintignore#239 . Of course if you want parts of that directory to be linted and formatted then you can modify that file

Re: Outline of a plan to remove all XUL documents from mozilla-central

Which test files are we talking about here? If they are testing UI widgets, and our long-term goal is to use html and not xhtml for the UI then those tests should, at some point, be in html. On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 1:48 PM Brian Grinstead wrote: > There isn't any particular reason functionally

Re: Lack of browser mochitests in non-e10s configuration and support for turning off e10s on desktop going forward

Is there still a configuration (ignoring hidden prefs) that can cause a user to end up using non-e10s? If so we should turn these tests back on. On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 8:25 AM Joel Maher wrote: > Here is where we initially turned on non-e10s tests for win7: >

Re: Announcing ./mach busted

This is awesome. It is so frustrating to hit issues that stop you from being able to build and test your work. Glad that we're making it easier to solve issues as you find them. On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 9:12 AM Bobby Holley wrote: > TL;DR - In bug 1543241 (alias 'mach-busted'), we now have a

Re: MOZ_DBG

I just landed support for MOZ_DBG for nsIFile (shows the path of the file) and nsIURI (shows the uri spec) onto inbound. On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 8:04 AM Dave Townsend wrote: > This sounds excellent. I think on Monday I'll go right to work making this > work for URIs which are pr

Re: MOZ_DBG

This sounds excellent. I think on Monday I'll go right to work making this work for URIs which are probably the things I end up logging the most from C++. On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 11:16 PM Cameron McCormack wrote: > Lately I've been finding Rust's dbg!() macro[1] useful for quick > debugging.

Re: Running different instances of Firefox side-by-side

ntioning this post on dev-platform rather than > the bug where the regression was introduced). > > - Marco. > > > Il 13/03/19 22:14, Dave Townsend ha scritto: > > A quick update here. After hearing some feedback from folks I've filed > the > > following bug

Re: Running different instances of Firefox side-by-side

is running. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1535144 Return -new-instance to its previous behaviour. On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 11:35 AM Dave Townsend wrote: > Woah this email got long. How Firefox considers whether to pass off to an > existing instance of Firefox or continue launching a n

Re: Searchfox now indexing m-beta, m-release, m-esr60

Thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you. (I appreciate this) On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 11:15 AM Kartikaya Gupta wrote: > Due to popular demand, searchfox now also has > mozilla-{beta,release,esr60} repos. Text search only for now; blame

Running different instances of Firefox side-by-side

Woah this email got long. How Firefox considers whether to pass off to an existing instance of Firefox or continue launching a new one turns out to be more complex than you might expect. I'm mostly interested in making folks aware of and giving feedback on how this works after I've changed some

Re: Coming in Firefox 65: Dedicated Profiles Per Install and Profile Downgrade Protection

Townsend wrote: > Just a heads up, we've decided to defer this change to a later release to > make sure we get the experience right for our users. I'll post another > update once we have a better idea of when this will land. > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 12:32 PM Dave Townsend > wrot

Re: Skipping changesets when viewing blame

This is wonderful! Thanks especially for back-filling the eslint work. On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 8:58 AM Felipe G wrote: > If you ran `mach bootstrap` or `mach vcs-setup` in the last month, you > should already have a new hg command alias called `smart-annotate`, which > runs `hg annotate` while

Re: Checking if an nsIURI came from a resource: URL

This suggests that channel.originalURI should help: https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/netwerk/base/nsIChannel.idl#37 On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 9:19 AM Henri Sivonen wrote: > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 3:23 PM Daniel Veditz wrote: > > > > I'm afraid to ask why you want to treat these

Re: HG problem: abort: decoding near '9: error: ‘sse2::l': 'ascii' codec can't decode byte 0xe2 in position 213: ordinal not in range(128)

I would report this to mercurial. On Sat, Dec 1, 2018 at 11:53 PM ISHIKAWA,chiaki wrote: > Hi, > > I am developing mozilla patches locally under my local PC running linux. > > I often include the GCC's error/warning message in the mercurial > commit message (in the second and subsequent lines,

Re: The upcoming C/C++ coding style change

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 4:38 AM Sylvestre Ledru wrote: > The experimentation with dom/media highlighted that we need an efficient > way to automatically rebase patches before the merge. > To achieve this, we updated the bootstrap process to include an extension > called hg formatsource. > This

Re: Coming in Firefox 65: Dedicated Profiles Per Install and Profile Downgrade Protection

Just a heads up, we've decided to defer this change to a later release to make sure we get the experience right for our users. I'll post another update once we have a better idea of when this will land. On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 12:32 PM Dave Townsend wrote: > In Firefox 65 we intend to ship

Re: Coming in Firefox 65: Dedicated Profiles Per Install and Profile Downgrade Protection

had setup > just because firefox updated. > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 11:21 PM Dave Townsend > wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 3:20 PM Mike Hommey wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 12:32:36PM -0700, Dave Townsend wrote: >>> > In Firefox 6

Re: Coming in Firefox 65: Dedicated Profiles Per Install and Profile Downgrade Protection

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 3:20 PM Mike Hommey wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 12:32:36PM -0700, Dave Townsend wrote: > > In Firefox 65 we intend to ship two new features to help prevent user > > frustration caused by using profiles created by newer versions of > Fi

Re: Coming in Firefox 65: Dedicated Profiles Per Install and Profile Downgrade Protection

gt; On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 2:43 PM mhoye wrote: > >> >> >> -- Original Message -- >> From: "Dave Townsend" >> To: "dev-platform" ; "Firefox Dev" < >> firefox-...@mozilla.org> >> Sent: 2018-10-18 3:32:36 PM >

Re: Coming in Firefox 65: Dedicated Profiles Per Install and Profile Downgrade Protection

On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 6:31 AM Tom Ritter wrote: > Awesome! > > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 3:32 PM Dave Townsend > wrote: > > > For cases where users manually downgrade an install of Firefox or > attempt > > > to forcefully use an older version of Firefox wi

Coming in Firefox 65: Dedicated Profiles Per Install and Profile Downgrade Protection

In Firefox 65 we intend to ship two new features to help prevent user frustration caused by using profiles created by newer versions of Firefox. Why Firefox stores all of its settings in the user’s profile and unless certain command line arguments are used Firefox always launches with the same

Re: Moving Windows MSVC Builds Back To Tier 1

If we've made the decision to stick with clang-cl, why would we continue to support MSVC builds going forwards? On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 1:06 PM Ryan VanderMeulen wrote: > When we made the decision to switch to clang-cl for our Windows builds, > MSVC builds and tests were kept running as Tier 2

Re: mozilla-central Fails to Build on Mac With Latest Xcode (10.0)

This seems to be tracked in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1487552 On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 5:12 AM J. Ryan Stinnett wrote: > The Xcode 10 Release Notes[1] in the "Command Line Tools" heading suggests > that future versions will not provide a *.pkg to install headers to >

Re: Stopgap for Commit Series in Phabricator

This is an excellent tool and I'm using it for basically all my submissions. Just one word of warning though, it doesn't currently support submitting patches that contain binary files at this time. The binary file will become truncated at phabricator, so watch out for that. On Thu, Jul 26, 2018

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

On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 3:54 PM Gregory Szorc wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 3:45 PM, Dave Townsend > wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 3:06 PM Sebastian Hengst wrote: >> >> > Original-Nachricht >> > Betreff: Re: mozilla-inbound b

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

On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 3:06 PM Sebastian Hengst wrote: > Original-Nachricht > Betreff: Re: mozilla-inbound backout policy subject to change (become > similar to autoland) > Von: Boris Zbarsky > Datum: 2018-06-24 21:28 > > On 6/19/18 9:04 AM, Sebastian Hengst wrote: > >>

Re: Update on rustc/clang goodness

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 10:03 PM Jeff Gilbert wrote: > I get that, but it reminds me of the reasons people give for "our > website works best in $browser". > I was concerned by this too but found myself swayed by the arguments in

Re: Is super-review still a thing?

Presumably it supports multiple reviews for a patch, in which case I think we're fine. On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 3:03 PM Gregory Szorc wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 2:51 PM, L. David Baron wrote: > > > On Friday 2018-04-20 14:23 -0700, Kris Maglione wrote:

Re: Is super-review still a thing?

No, super-review has not really been a thing for some time, we should remove documentation suggesting it is. That said we definitely have room for this kind of architectural review. Webidl for example already uses something like this. On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 2:24 PM Kris Maglione

Re: Intent to implement: Early, experimental support for application/javascript+binast

This is awesome. I understand that we already do some kind of pre-compile for our chrome code, is there any plan/benefit to switch to this eventually there? On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 9:50 AM David Teller wrote: > # Summary > > JavaScript parsing and compilation are

Re: CPU core count game!

What is the point you're trying to drive home? On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, 15:58 Steve Fink wrote: > Just to drive home a point, let's play a game. > > First, guesstimate what percentage of our users have systems with 2 or > fewer cores. > > Then visit

Re: The future of "remote XUL"

My understanding is that it has been effectively unsupported for some time anyway so I think we should just go ahead and disable it altogether at this point. If we need bits for automated tests then we should work to switch tests away from those if we can. On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 8:36 AM Boris

Re: FYI: Short Nightly Shield Study involving DNS over HTTPs (DoH)

As one of the folks who brought up the initial concern let me be clear that at this point my only real concern here is one of optics. The DoH service we're using is likely more private than anything the user is currently using. I just don't want to see random folks on the web "discover" these DoH

Re: FYI: Short Nightly Shield Study involving DNS over HTTPs (DoH)

On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 5:27 PM Patrick McManus wrote: > Obviously, using a central resolver is the downside to this approach - but > its being explored because we believe that using the right resolver can be > a net win compared to the disastrous state of unsecured local

Re: FYI: Short Nightly Shield Study involving DNS over HTTPs (DoH)

On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 3:51 AM Patrick McManus wrote: > DoH is an open standard and for this test we'll be using the DoH server > implementation at Cloudflare. As is typical for Mozilla, when we > default-interact with a third party service we have a legal agreement in >

Browser Architecture Newsletter 5

Welcome to the exciting fifth instalment in our series of Browser Architecture Newsletters! Storage and Sync We are pleased to report that the Sync and Storage roadmap proposal successfully passed review by dcamp. Thanks to the 20+ people from around the organization who helped us build

Re: Overriding JS to allow for opening in a new tab?

We have some precedent for overriding a site. Popup blocking and redirecting new windows to tabs for example. But I'm not sure how we could technically do this here. If the site is doing some JS work (possibly including async stuff) ultimately ending with an assignment to window.location how would

De-XBL Plans

For some time now we've been talking about moving away from XUL and XBL. The browser architecture team has been hard at work figuring out how to go about doing that and we're ready to share the first of our proposals more widely. We have developed a plan to remove XBL from Firefox. It's been

Re: We need better canaries for JS code

allowing > modules to opt-in to using them, perhaps just as an experiment. Presumably > most existing modules wouldn't, but new ones being written might. > > Dan > 2017-10-18 9:06 GMT-07:00 Dave Townsend <dtowns...@mozilla.com>: > >> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 4:51 AM

Re: We need better canaries for JS code

On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 4:51 AM Mark Banner wrote: > I remember that we had bugs of this kind lurking for years in our > codebase, in code that was triggered daily and that everybody believed > to be tested. > > I'd like to think that there is a better way to handle these

Browser Architecture Newsletter 3

es. We’re getting ready to run through a design review for our XBL replacement plans. The review will be chaired by Dave Townsend and include a panel of experts on both Gecko and Firefox. The review process itself is a work in progress, and our XBL Removal review is a trial run to help us refine it. L

Re: Switching to per-channel profiles

On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Richard Newman wrote: > How we populate the new profile we create for Nightly and Beta channels is >> an open question. We could simply clone the existing Release profile or use >> Firefox Refresh to copy across the basic data. In either case

Re: Switching to per-channel profiles

On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Aki Sasaki wrote: > I'm a Nightly only user who periodically uses Release, and I'm not > thrilled with the idea of my profile going away. Nightly users are probably > better suited to dealing with this (using sync, etc) than the Beta >

Re: Switching to per-channel profiles

On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Mike Hommey <m...@glandium.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 03:43:54PM -0700, Dave Townsend wrote: > > TL;DR: We should make each Firefox channel use its own profile data > > allowing you to run multiple channels at the same time. >

Switching to per-channel profiles

TL;DR: We should make each Firefox channel use its own profile data allowing you to run multiple channels at the same time. Running multiple channels of Firefox is currently harder than it needs to be. You can't start more than one channel at a time and either you use the same profile data for

Re: Switching to async/await from Task.jsm/yield

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Joshua Cranmer  <pidgeo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/16/2017 5:29 PM, Dave Townsend wrote: > >> For a long time now we've been writing JS code that waits for promises >> using Task.jsm and generator functions. Recently though the JS team add

Re: Switching to async/await from Task.jsm/yield

It looks like the main concern raised about switching over to async/await where possible is bug 1242505. We're going to try to get some resources for fixing that bug and it probably blocks doing a mass rewrite of existing code but I don't think it blocks people starting to use async/await right

Re: Better download security through browsers

I remember that Gerv was interested in a similar idea many years ago, you might want to see if he went anywhere with it. https://blog.gerv.net/2005/03/link_fingerprin_1/ On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Gregory Szorc wrote: > I recently reinstalled Windows 10 on one of my

Re: intent to remove: standalone about:addons UI and tests

I agree that this has outlived its usefulness and we should remove it and cleanup the code where we can. On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Robert Helmer wrote: > Currently we support running the about:addons UI in both a standalone > window, and also in a browser tab. > >

Re: Switching to async/await from Task.jsm/yield

cause problems as we attempt to automatically rewrite older code and tests make bad assumptions. On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Dave Townsend <dtowns...@mozilla.com> wrote: > For a long time now we've been writing JS code that waits for promises > using Task.jsm and generator functio

Switching to async/await from Task.jsm/yield

For a long time now we've been writing JS code that waits for promises using Task.jsm and generator functions. Recently though the JS team added support for the JS standard way of doing this, async/await: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Statements/async_function

Re: Is there a way to improve partial compilation times?

70 minutes is about what a clobber build takes on my Surface Book. And yes I agree, it is way too much! On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: > On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 11:29:00AM -0800, zbranie...@mozilla.com wrote: > > So, > > > > I'm on Dell XPS 13 (9350), and

Re: Deprecating XUL in new UI

ld be a good candidate. > > Matthew > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Dave Townsend <dtowns...@mozilla.com> > wrote: > >> One of the things I've been investigating since moving back to the >> desktop team is how we can remove XUL from the application as much as

Re: Deprecating XUL in new UI

es inside one XUL > document (happens when doing incremental migration), it can be challenging > to make flex-like layouts work correctly. The standard flex layout and the > XUL flex (-moz-box) interact in ways that are hard to understand. > > Jarda > > > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017

Re: Deprecating XUL in new UI

or a new Web Component binding, to > follow on from MattN's thinking. > > -- Mike > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Dave Townsend <dtowns...@mozilla.com> > wrote: > >> One of the things I've been investigating since moving back to the >> desktop team is

Deprecating XUL in new UI

One of the things I've been investigating since moving back to the desktop team is how we can remove XUL from the application as much as possible. The benefits for doing this are varied, some obvious examples: * XUL is a proprietary standard and we barely maintain it. * Shallower learning curve

Re: Help ridding tests of unsafe CPOWs

I am working on a patch that takes care of most of the warnings in toolkit/mozapps/extensions/test/xpinstall in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1311459 On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Blake Kaplan wrote: > Hello everybody, > > I've been seeing a pattern of

Re: Rust 1.10 (to be) required to build Firefox with --enable-rust

Does MozillaBuild include the appropriate version of rust? On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote: > TL; DR: As the subject says, although the patch is not yet on > mozilla-central. You may want to pre-emptively update your Rust > before the build system

Re: Two Factor Authentication and Github

Github supports using SMS as the 2nd factor in many countries (Belgium included) so a smartphone is not always required. https://help.github.com/articles/countries-where-sms-authentication-is-supported/ On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Jared Hirsch <6...@mozilla.com> wrote: > A smartphone isn't

Re: One Firefox repository to rule them all

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote: > I'm pleased to announce the immediate availability of some *experimental* > read-only Mercurial repositories containing the combined, useful history of > the various Firefox repositories, all in chronological order and

Switching to ESLint 2

I've just landed patches on fx-team which switch the in-tree configuration and our automatic linting checks to use ESLint 2. If you're running linting checks locally you will need to update. As usual "mach eslint --setup" will install the things you need.

Re: XULRunner future and ownership

I'm not sure why that page links to the nightly builds but the release versions are here: http://archive.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/ Note that Firefox 45 hasn't been released yet so the latest SDK is for one of the beta versions. On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 7:21 AM, Devan Shah

Re: XULRunner future and ownership

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 8:39 AM, Devan Shah <devan.sha...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 at 10:43:44 AM UTC-5, Dave Townsend wrote: >> I'm not sure why that page links to the nightly builds but the release >> versions are here: http://archive.mozilla.org

Re: nsIDOMWindow is deprecated now is there an alternative?

Yeah, Firefox 41 and later don't support binary XPCOM components in extensions. ctypes is still supported and so are binary plugins. On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Kyle Huey wrote: > Ok. I thought we killed binary components in extensions ... > > There will be a lot of

Re: Just Autoland It

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 7:27 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 6:22 AM, Andrew Halberstadt < > ahalberst...@mozilla.com> wrote: > >> On 28/01/16 06:31 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Gregory Szorc >>> wrote:

Re: Unsafe CPOWs are about to be outlawed in browser code

I don't think that this is meant to impact add-on code at all, unless it is calling browser code and making it do something unsafe, in which case it would be up to the add-on developer to fix that. It's probably worth filing a bug to track what is going on there though. On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at

Re: Splitting inner and outer windows

Does this mean that window objects will no longer implement nsIDOMWindow (at least as far as JS is concerned)? Querying for nsIDOMWindow is something add-ons do a lot and I'd expect to see a lot of add-ons break if we changed that. On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Kyle Huey

Re: [Responses Needed by Jan 27] Identifying Owners of Bugzilla Components in Firefox, Toolkit, and Core

Is there any reason not to make the link publicly accessible? Then no-one needs to request access. On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Emma Humphries wrote: > I understand, and if non-mozilla.com community members need access, > email me or request access from inside the sheet. >

Re: Just Autoland It

Should we just add a "and land it" checkbox to the review page, maybe disabled if there are still open issues? On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 6:35 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote: > If you have level 3 source code access (can push to central, inbound, > fx-team) and have pushed to MozReview

Re: Heads-up: SHA1 deprecation (for newly issued certs) causes trouble with local ssl-proxy mitm spyware

aus5 (the server the app updater checks) is still pinned: https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/security/manager/ssl/StaticHPKPins.h#739 On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Robert Strong wrote: > On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Jesper Kristensen < >

Re: When the beta version of firefox with e10s would be released?

The developer edition already ships with e10s so you can test against that. On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 10:32 PM, Yonggang Luo wrote: > I am looking for it to developing mutli-process based firefox addons/apps > ___ > dev-platform

ESLint tracking and target rules for desktop

So we can keep track of all of the work going on with eslinting the world I've filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1229856. Please add any bugs that you're working on there and look there if you're wanting to work on something. I've also just landed the default eslint rules for

ESLint is now available in the entire tree

Thanks to some speedy work by Mark Banner and help from Mike Conley, Felipe Gomes and Gijs Kruitbosch we've now landed the changes to make it possible to run "mach eslint" on any directory in the tree. The default rules for the tree are almost non-existent so this is mostly checking for syntax

Re: In the new e10s multiprocess model, is that possible to calling XPCOM in the client process?

XPCOM is available in the child process but whether the specific component you want works there or not is a different question. Some components have proxies in the child process to make them work, some work just fine and some don't work at all. Which component do you care about? On Wed, Nov 25,

Re: Does the sdk/page-worker are loading pages off-main thread? and running code in another thread?

Current release versions will load page-workers in the main process, nightly has been updated to load in a child process if e10s is enabled. On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 10:59 PM, 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) wrote: > pageWorker = require("sdk/page-worker").Page({ contentScript: >

Re: Where can i download firefox-sdk

As of Firefox 41 we no longer support loading binary components from add-ons. On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 5:44 AM, wrote: > Hi all. > > I am developing firefox addon with a binary component, and until recently > i was using xulrunner-sdk for linking with required libs. As

Re: Where can i download firefox-sdk

Then I'm not sure why you need the gecko sdk to build it. On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 10:19 AM, <ales.rozman...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sunday, November 8, 2015 at 4:07:22 PM UTC+1, Dave Townsend wrote: > > As of Firefox 41 we no longer support loading binary components f

Re: Firefox Architects

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 1:17 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman dirk...@ochtman.nl wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 4:29 AM, Dave Camp dc...@mozilla.com wrote: Thanks to the Firefox Architects for stepping up. Sounds great! From your addressing, I assume most of the communication from/to this group should

Re: Linux builds now default to building with Gtk+3

Can we update the bootstrap script to install the necessary development files? On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:38 PM, Mike Hommey m...@glandium.org wrote: Hi, If you've followed the recent discussion in the GTK3 linux builds thread, this will come with no surprise, but if not: - Next Linux

Re: State synchronization - use cases?

The blocklist service also downloads about once a day On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote: On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Richard Barnes rbar...@mozilla.com wrote: If anyone has use cases in addition to the above, please let me know. Public suffix?

Re: changing the default platform and operating-system on bugzilla.mozilla.org to all / all

Are the platform fields actually useful? Most bugs apply to all platforms and in the cases that don't it is normally clear from the bug conversation that it is platform specific. It seems like we rarely go an update the platform fields to match the actual state of the bug. And then there is the

Re: Will there be a followup on e10s inputs?

We have been periodically building summaries of this feedback and checking that there are bugs on file where appropriate. I don't know when we last did this but maybe Chris can help. On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 3:43 AM, jes...@staunhansen.dk wrote: Hi, I see that an awful lot of people leave

Re: e10s is now enabled by default for Nightly!

On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 1:40 AM, Gijs Kruitbosch gijskruitbo...@gmail.com wrote: Where can we read about how this decision was made? On my profiles with Force RTL, e10s perma-crashes ( https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/ show_bug.cgi?id=1072980 ), and in most other cases, I only ever see spinners

Re: Why in .manifest file, the resource directive doesn't support for '-' in alias name.

On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Yonggang Luo luoyongg...@gmail.com wrote: For example. The following code doesn't work resource testing-commn testing-common/ Do you have any details on what problems or error messages you see with that. As far as I can see a hyphen should be just fine, in

Re: Upcoming changes to Mac package layout, signing

On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Robert Strong rstr...@mozilla.com wrote: - Original Message - From: Philipp Kewisch mozi...@kewis.ch To: dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 4:49:35 PM Subject: Re: Upcoming changes to Mac package layout, signing

Re: Exporting user configurations

I seem to remember that the SUMO folk had an add-on that would install restartlessly and gather system info to pass along to them. I don't remember the specifics though. On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Nicholas Nethercote n.netherc...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I wrote a blog post about a bug

Re: Switching Jetpack to use the runtests.py automation

On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Gregory Szorc g...@mozilla.com wrote: On 8/4/14, 10:39 AM, Dave Townsend wrote: I've done a little investigation into marionette and I've found a few issues with it: Firstly it doesn't look like running marionette directly or through mach allows developers

Re: Switching Jetpack to use the runtests.py automation

: Gregory Szorc wrote on 07/15/2014 09:04 PM: On 7/15/14, 11:49 AM, Dave Townsend wrote: Since forever Jetpack tests in the Firefox trees have been run using our custom python CFX tool which is based on a fork of an ancient version of mozrunner. This causes us a number of problems. Keeping

Re: Column numbers appended to URLs recently

I'm guessing this is a result of https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=762556 On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote: On 3/3/14 1:54 PM, Jan Honza Odvarko wrote: An example of the stack trace: http://example.com/path/file.html:102 Which exact API is

  1   2   >