[webkit-dev] PSA: Github mirror will be out of sync until May 6th

2013-04-30 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
Hi there,

Due to the move from one office to a another, our network infra-structure
here will be down for the next 3 or 4 days.

I won't be able to keep the github mirror in sync with
git.webkit.orgduring this period, but it will be back to normality
next Monday, May 6th.

Best regards,
Jesus
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Is there a plan for supporting multi-process and WebCL in webkit

2013-04-09 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
Hi,

WebKit already support a split process model which is what we call WebKit2 [1].
I'm not aware of any official plans of supporting WebCL but I believe
Samsung was doing some research on this [2].

[1] http://trac.webkit.org/wiki/WebKit2
[2] https://code.google.com/p/webcl/

Cheers,
jesus


2013/4/9 Oneal Bluce onealbl...@yahoo.com:
 Hello, I'm a researcher and I just focusing on the multi-process supporting
 and WebCL supporting in browser engin. so I have some concerns about the
 both features.
 In recently, Google has pronounced that they will support the multi-process
 in their browser egin(Blink) which is forked from the webkit. but Google
 will not supporting the WebCL in Blink.  so I just want to know is there a
 plan supporting the multi-process and WebCL in webkit.


 Cheers,
 Oneal

 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Compiling WebKit up to 25% faster in Windows?

2013-03-26 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
2013/3/26 Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org:
 On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Filip Pizlo fpi...@apple.com wrote:


 On Mar 26, 2013, at 1:40 PM, Dirk Pranke dpra...@chromium.org wrote:

 On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Benjamin Poulain benja...@webkit.org
 wrote:

 On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Dirk Pranke dpra...@chromium.org wrote

 If we have consensus that we should just switch to paths relative to
 Source (or maybe a couple different options), that would be (IMO) a big 
 win.
 It sounds like Daniel  co. have already done the big bang conversion.


 I think using full path would be a serious hit regarding hackability.

 I would rather spend some time tweaking my compiler to cache each
 directory content than waste time finding where is every single header I
 need to include.


 Interesting. I have the exact opposite experience, having to paw around to
 figure out where Font.h actually lives rather than just seeing
 WebCore/platform/graphics/Font.h.

 At any rate, to be clear, I would be in favor of that change but I'm not
 expecting it to happen :).


 I'm with Dirk on this.  Full path would help hackability for me.

 I don't use an IDE, so I'll be typing more.  But I spend more time reading
 code than typing code.

 Also we have a lot of stupid in header file naming right now.  For example
 the DFG calls the JSC::DFG::Node header DFGNode.h, and puts it in
 JavaScriptCore/dfg/DFGNode.h.  So we duplicate the namespacing of
 JSC::DFG::Node in both the filename and the directory name.  Ridiculous!  If
 we had a discipline to always include using paths relative to Source, then
 we could just rename it to JavaScriptCore/dfg/Node.h.  That would make me
 happy.


 That'll make me sad because then Xcode will then find both
 WebCore/dom/Node.h and JavaScriptCode/dfg/Node.h when I type Node.h.

 Unfortunately, we can't name Node.h in WebCore/dom DOMNode.h because
 DOMNode.h already exists for Objective C bindings.


IMHO, we should be favoring code readability instead of a tool's feature.

+1 for full paths.

-jesus



 - R. Niwa


 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] About USE(CROSS_PLATFORM_CONTEXT_MENUS)

2013-03-08 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
Hi,


2013/2/25 Adam Roben aro...@webkit.org:
 I was having a look at our Context Menu design when this USE flag got
 my attention. Can someone help me clarify the motivation for it?

 The motivation is explained pretty well in the ChangeLog for r73802,
 which introduced this flag. I'll try to give a little explanation here
 too.

Yes, thanks for the explanation. I got mislead by another revision...
Indeed it provides a good clean up for the ContextMenu code in WebCore
so I have filled https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111874.


 Also, is there any other port using it?

 I don't believe so. But if you look at ContextMenu[Item].h, it looks
 like CHROMIUM and EFL could very easily switch over to it; they've
 already implemented something very similar by abusing the
 PlatformMenuItemDescription typedef.

Yes, I've already uploaded a patch for EFL. I will give it a try for
Chromium as well.


Cheers,
jesus



 -Adam
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Kickstarting the migration of platform-specific WebCore source code to Source/Platform

2013-03-01 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
Hi,

2013/2/28 Darin Adler da...@apple.com:
 To do this, we need to eliminate dependencies from the platform directory to 
 the rest of WebCore.

 At this time, we are far from that. Many dependencies on the DOM and other 
 such things have crept into the platform directory.

I would be happy to help fixing this, Darin. Are the bugs blocking
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21354 a good-enough to start
list or is there something more urgent?

Cheers,
jesus
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] About USE(CROSS_PLATFORM_CONTEXT_MENUS)

2013-02-22 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
Hi again,

It's been 2 days since the first email on this thread. Should I assume
that no one is then relying on this USE flag? It adds quite a fair
amount of code to all ContextMenu related files and I could clean that
up if necessary.

Cheers,
jesus

2013/2/20 Jesus Sanchez-Palencia je...@webkit.org:
 Hello,

 I was having a look at our Context Menu design when this USE flag got
 my attention. Can someone help me clarify the motivation for it? It
 seems that only PLATFORM(WIN) is using it, but I'm not sure if for
 both WK1 and WK2...

 Also, is there any other port using it?

 Cheers,
 jesus
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


[webkit-dev] About USE(CROSS_PLATFORM_CONTEXT_MENUS)

2013-02-20 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
Hello,

I was having a look at our Context Menu design when this USE flag got
my attention. Can someone help me clarify the motivation for it? It
seems that only PLATFORM(WIN) is using it, but I'm not sure if for
both WK1 and WK2...

Also, is there any other port using it?

Cheers,
jesus
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Github repository not being updated

2013-02-18 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
Fixed a few hours ago.

During my holidays last week there was a network failure problem,
followed by one of those vcproj files becoming dirty and not
allowing the mirror to update itself.

Sorry of the inconvenience.

cheers,
jesus

2013/2/16 Vivek Galatage viv...@webkit.org:
 Hello Webkit-dev,

 I am using the github repository https://github.com/webkit/webkit but since
 the rev 142863 its not been updated. i.e. since 3 days.

 So wanted to see if someone who is maintaining this repo can look into this
 and fix if possible.

 Many thanks,
 Vivek

 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Changing Github repository to mirror git.webkit.org (was Github vs. git.webkit.org)

2013-01-25 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
Sorry, we have been facing network issues here for the past few
days... Anyway, should be fixed now and it is pushing the current
git.webkit.org HEAD already.

Cheers,
jesus

2013/1/25 Florin Malita fmal...@google.com:
 Looks like mirroring stopped on 1/23 (last commit:
 https://github.com/WebKit/webkit/commit/d5c4f2bd4a80b397eade1ee53b39d738e5656598).

 Jesus, can you take a look?

 Thanks,
 Florin


 On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Jesus Sanchez-Palencia je...@webkit.org
 wrote:

 Hi,

 The mirror is finally ready again: https://github.com/WebKit/webkit
 It now follows the same hashes of git.webkit.org. People who have
 forked this repository on github before will now have to rebase their
 branches.

 I was hold back a bit because Github wasn't allowing me to push more
 than 2GB. I contacted them but before I could get answer I decide to
 'split' the push. First I git reset --hard the repository back to a
 commit from 2008, pushed this, then reset --hard to 2009 and pushed
 this, and so on.

 In the middle of the process the folks from github increased our push
 limit to 20GB and David (barrbrain) was kind enough to push one last
 sync, getting us back to 2012. After that I kept the syncing manullay
 for a few hours but now the repository is being updated automatically
 every 5 minutes to stay in sync with git.webkit.org .

 I will now coordinate with William so we can get Apple pushing to the
 mirror at the same time they push to git.webkit.org .

 Thanks everyone that got involved for the help!

 Cheers,
 jesus

 2013/1/14 Jesus Sanchez-Palencia je...@webkit.org:
  Hi,
 
  Just yet another quick heads-up:
 
  2013/1/14 Jesus Sanchez-Palencia je...@webkit.org:
  We have decided that the best approach for this is to start a new
  repository (webkit-mirror), delete the old one
  (https://github.com/WebKit/webkit) and then rename the new repository.
 
  I had to change my strategy here after talking to a few people on
  #github.
  It seems that doing a git push -f to the current repository
  (https://github.com/WebKit/webkit) will actually have less impact on
  people branching/forking it on github. In other words, it should be
  less painful to rebase your fork on github for the new hashes after
  I'm done with the setup.
 
  I will let you know when the switching is done.
 
  Cheers,
  jesus
 
 
  I will be doing the mirroring myself for while, until Apple can set
  this up from the same machine that git pushes to git.webkit.org.
 
  People that are using the current github repository will probably have
  to re-clone and rebase their branches.
 
  This won't affect git.webkit.org or any other official WebKit
  repository.
 
 
  Cheers,
  jesus
 
 
 
  2012/12/11 Jesus Sanchez-Palencia jesus.palen...@openbossa.org:
  Hi,
 
  2012/12/4 Tor Arne Vestbø tor.arne.ves...@digia.com:
 
  Bill, what do you think about pushing the official SVN import to
  GitHub as
  well?
 
  tor arne
 
  Any updates about this?
 
  Cheers,
  jesus
 
 
 
 
  So we might be able to rename the existing one and ask github to
  pull
  our git.webkit.org http://git.webkit.org repository into
 
  github/WebKit/webkit.
  Apparently Apache takes that way: https://github.com/apache
  The mirroring icon indicates kind of official-ness.
 
  I don't know how long their mirroring delay is, though.
 
 
 
  On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Tor Arne Vestbø
  tor.arne.ves...@digia.com mailto:tor.arne.ves...@digia.com
  wrote:
 
  On 11/28/12 16:55 , Adam Barth wrote:
 
  My sense is that the WebKit community would prefer that the
  hashes in
  GitHub match the hashes in git.webkit.org
  http://git.webkit.org so that folks can more
 
  easily move branches between the two.  For my part, I've
  switched over
  to using GitHub exclusive of git.webkit.org
  http://git.webkit.org, so the the difference in
 
  hashes aren't an issue for me, but I can understand why
  they'd be
  problematic for other people.
 
 
  Yepp, agreed. Let's switch it over.
 
 
  After the force-push, would you still be able to push
  updates
  automatically?  If so, you can switch the hashes whenever
  is
  convenient for you.  (It might be nice to announce the
  date/time
  on
  this list so that folks aren't taken by surprise.)
 
 
  The mirror is also pushed to
  http://gitorious.org/webkit/__webkit
  http://gitorious.org/webkit/webkit, which I was planning to
  keep
 
  as is for now, so that would mean setting up an extra mirroring
  for
  the non-author-rewritten history :/ Also, the server I run this
  on
  has a somewhat uncertain future. With that in mind it's
  probably
  easier to just push directly from the same import that's pushed
  to
  git.webkit.org http://git.webkit.org, and make the GitHub
  mirror
 
  an official mirror?
 
  tor arne

Re: [webkit-dev] Changing Github repository to mirror git.webkit.org (was Github vs. git.webkit.org)

2013-01-16 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
Hi,

The mirror is finally ready again: https://github.com/WebKit/webkit
It now follows the same hashes of git.webkit.org. People who have
forked this repository on github before will now have to rebase their
branches.

I was hold back a bit because Github wasn't allowing me to push more
than 2GB. I contacted them but before I could get answer I decide to
'split' the push. First I git reset --hard the repository back to a
commit from 2008, pushed this, then reset --hard to 2009 and pushed
this, and so on.

In the middle of the process the folks from github increased our push
limit to 20GB and David (barrbrain) was kind enough to push one last
sync, getting us back to 2012. After that I kept the syncing manullay
for a few hours but now the repository is being updated automatically
every 5 minutes to stay in sync with git.webkit.org .

I will now coordinate with William so we can get Apple pushing to the
mirror at the same time they push to git.webkit.org .

Thanks everyone that got involved for the help!

Cheers,
jesus

2013/1/14 Jesus Sanchez-Palencia je...@webkit.org:
 Hi,

 Just yet another quick heads-up:

 2013/1/14 Jesus Sanchez-Palencia je...@webkit.org:
 We have decided that the best approach for this is to start a new
 repository (webkit-mirror), delete the old one
 (https://github.com/WebKit/webkit) and then rename the new repository.

 I had to change my strategy here after talking to a few people on #github.
 It seems that doing a git push -f to the current repository
 (https://github.com/WebKit/webkit) will actually have less impact on
 people branching/forking it on github. In other words, it should be
 less painful to rebase your fork on github for the new hashes after
 I'm done with the setup.

 I will let you know when the switching is done.

 Cheers,
 jesus


 I will be doing the mirroring myself for while, until Apple can set
 this up from the same machine that git pushes to git.webkit.org.

 People that are using the current github repository will probably have
 to re-clone and rebase their branches.

 This won't affect git.webkit.org or any other official WebKit repository.


 Cheers,
 jesus



 2012/12/11 Jesus Sanchez-Palencia jesus.palen...@openbossa.org:
 Hi,

 2012/12/4 Tor Arne Vestbø tor.arne.ves...@digia.com:

 Bill, what do you think about pushing the official SVN import to GitHub as
 well?

 tor arne

 Any updates about this?

 Cheers,
 jesus




 So we might be able to rename the existing one and ask github to pull
 our git.webkit.org http://git.webkit.org repository into

 github/WebKit/webkit.
 Apparently Apache takes that way: https://github.com/apache
 The mirroring icon indicates kind of official-ness.

 I don't know how long their mirroring delay is, though.



 On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Tor Arne Vestbø
 tor.arne.ves...@digia.com mailto:tor.arne.ves...@digia.com wrote:

 On 11/28/12 16:55 , Adam Barth wrote:

 My sense is that the WebKit community would prefer that the
 hashes in
 GitHub match the hashes in git.webkit.org
 http://git.webkit.org so that folks can more

 easily move branches between the two.  For my part, I've
 switched over
 to using GitHub exclusive of git.webkit.org
 http://git.webkit.org, so the the difference in

 hashes aren't an issue for me, but I can understand why they'd be
 problematic for other people.


 Yepp, agreed. Let's switch it over.


 After the force-push, would you still be able to push updates
 automatically?  If so, you can switch the hashes whenever is
 convenient for you.  (It might be nice to announce the date/time
 on
 this list so that folks aren't taken by surprise.)


 The mirror is also pushed to http://gitorious.org/webkit/__webkit
 http://gitorious.org/webkit/webkit, which I was planning to keep

 as is for now, so that would mean setting up an extra mirroring for
 the non-author-rewritten history :/ Also, the server I run this on
 has a somewhat uncertain future. With that in mind it's probably
 easier to just push directly from the same import that's pushed to
 git.webkit.org http://git.webkit.org, and make the GitHub mirror

 an official mirror?

 tor arne

 _
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/__mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev





 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org

[webkit-dev] Changing Github repository to mirror git.webkit.org (was Github vs. git.webkit.org)

2013-01-14 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
Hi,

This email is a heads-up about the repository change we are starting
today in github.

In summary, now the github webkit repository will actually mirror
git.webkit.org and they will finally have the same git hashes. I won't
go into the benefits of this change since this has been widely
discussed in the past.

Since last week me, Tor Arne, William Siegrist, Adam Barth and Lucas
Forschler have been discussing the steps to move on with this and
since no one has raised any issues so far on previous discussions, I
will start this today.

We have decided that the best approach for this is to start a new
repository (webkit-mirror), delete the old one
(https://github.com/WebKit/webkit) and then rename the new repository.

I will be doing the mirroring myself for while, until Apple can set
this up from the same machine that git pushes to git.webkit.org.

People that are using the current github repository will probably have
to re-clone and rebase their branches.

This won't affect git.webkit.org or any other official WebKit repository.


Cheers,
jesus



2012/12/11 Jesus Sanchez-Palencia jesus.palen...@openbossa.org:
 Hi,

 2012/12/4 Tor Arne Vestbø tor.arne.ves...@digia.com:

 Bill, what do you think about pushing the official SVN import to GitHub as
 well?

 tor arne

 Any updates about this?

 Cheers,
 jesus




 So we might be able to rename the existing one and ask github to pull
 our git.webkit.org http://git.webkit.org repository into

 github/WebKit/webkit.
 Apparently Apache takes that way: https://github.com/apache
 The mirroring icon indicates kind of official-ness.

 I don't know how long their mirroring delay is, though.



 On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Tor Arne Vestbø
 tor.arne.ves...@digia.com mailto:tor.arne.ves...@digia.com wrote:

 On 11/28/12 16:55 , Adam Barth wrote:

 My sense is that the WebKit community would prefer that the
 hashes in
 GitHub match the hashes in git.webkit.org
 http://git.webkit.org so that folks can more

 easily move branches between the two.  For my part, I've
 switched over
 to using GitHub exclusive of git.webkit.org
 http://git.webkit.org, so the the difference in

 hashes aren't an issue for me, but I can understand why they'd be
 problematic for other people.


 Yepp, agreed. Let's switch it over.


 After the force-push, would you still be able to push updates
 automatically?  If so, you can switch the hashes whenever is
 convenient for you.  (It might be nice to announce the date/time
 on
 this list so that folks aren't taken by surprise.)


 The mirror is also pushed to http://gitorious.org/webkit/__webkit
 http://gitorious.org/webkit/webkit, which I was planning to keep

 as is for now, so that would mean setting up an extra mirroring for
 the non-author-rewritten history :/ Also, the server I run this on
 has a somewhat uncertain future. With that in mind it's probably
 easier to just push directly from the same import that's pushed to
 git.webkit.org http://git.webkit.org, and make the GitHub mirror

 an official mirror?

 tor arne

 _
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/__mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev





 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Changing Github repository to mirror git.webkit.org (was Github vs. git.webkit.org)

2013-01-14 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
The github repository has stopped being updated and will remain like
that for the next hours until I have finished the new setup.

cheers,
jesus


2013/1/14 Jesus Sanchez-Palencia je...@webkit.org:
 Hi,

 This email is a heads-up about the repository change we are starting
 today in github.

 In summary, now the github webkit repository will actually mirror
 git.webkit.org and they will finally have the same git hashes. I won't
 go into the benefits of this change since this has been widely
 discussed in the past.

 Since last week me, Tor Arne, William Siegrist, Adam Barth and Lucas
 Forschler have been discussing the steps to move on with this and
 since no one has raised any issues so far on previous discussions, I
 will start this today.

 We have decided that the best approach for this is to start a new
 repository (webkit-mirror), delete the old one
 (https://github.com/WebKit/webkit) and then rename the new repository.

 I will be doing the mirroring myself for while, until Apple can set
 this up from the same machine that git pushes to git.webkit.org.

 People that are using the current github repository will probably have
 to re-clone and rebase their branches.

 This won't affect git.webkit.org or any other official WebKit repository.


 Cheers,
 jesus



 2012/12/11 Jesus Sanchez-Palencia jesus.palen...@openbossa.org:
 Hi,

 2012/12/4 Tor Arne Vestbø tor.arne.ves...@digia.com:

 Bill, what do you think about pushing the official SVN import to GitHub as
 well?

 tor arne

 Any updates about this?

 Cheers,
 jesus




 So we might be able to rename the existing one and ask github to pull
 our git.webkit.org http://git.webkit.org repository into

 github/WebKit/webkit.
 Apparently Apache takes that way: https://github.com/apache
 The mirroring icon indicates kind of official-ness.

 I don't know how long their mirroring delay is, though.



 On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Tor Arne Vestbø
 tor.arne.ves...@digia.com mailto:tor.arne.ves...@digia.com wrote:

 On 11/28/12 16:55 , Adam Barth wrote:

 My sense is that the WebKit community would prefer that the
 hashes in
 GitHub match the hashes in git.webkit.org
 http://git.webkit.org so that folks can more

 easily move branches between the two.  For my part, I've
 switched over
 to using GitHub exclusive of git.webkit.org
 http://git.webkit.org, so the the difference in

 hashes aren't an issue for me, but I can understand why they'd be
 problematic for other people.


 Yepp, agreed. Let's switch it over.


 After the force-push, would you still be able to push updates
 automatically?  If so, you can switch the hashes whenever is
 convenient for you.  (It might be nice to announce the date/time
 on
 this list so that folks aren't taken by surprise.)


 The mirror is also pushed to http://gitorious.org/webkit/__webkit
 http://gitorious.org/webkit/webkit, which I was planning to keep

 as is for now, so that would mean setting up an extra mirroring for
 the non-author-rewritten history :/ Also, the server I run this on
 has a somewhat uncertain future. With that in mind it's probably
 easier to just push directly from the same import that's pushed to
 git.webkit.org http://git.webkit.org, and make the GitHub mirror

 an official mirror?

 tor arne

 _
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/__mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev





 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Changing Github repository to mirror git.webkit.org (was Github vs. git.webkit.org)

2013-01-14 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
Hi,

Just yet another quick heads-up:

 2013/1/14 Jesus Sanchez-Palencia je...@webkit.org:
 We have decided that the best approach for this is to start a new
 repository (webkit-mirror), delete the old one
 (https://github.com/WebKit/webkit) and then rename the new repository.

I had to change my strategy here after talking to a few people on #github.
It seems that doing a git push -f to the current repository
(https://github.com/WebKit/webkit) will actually have less impact on
people branching/forking it on github. In other words, it should be
less painful to rebase your fork on github for the new hashes after
I'm done with the setup.

I will let you know when the switching is done.

Cheers,
jesus


 I will be doing the mirroring myself for while, until Apple can set
 this up from the same machine that git pushes to git.webkit.org.

 People that are using the current github repository will probably have
 to re-clone and rebase their branches.

 This won't affect git.webkit.org or any other official WebKit repository.


 Cheers,
 jesus



 2012/12/11 Jesus Sanchez-Palencia jesus.palen...@openbossa.org:
 Hi,

 2012/12/4 Tor Arne Vestbø tor.arne.ves...@digia.com:

 Bill, what do you think about pushing the official SVN import to GitHub as
 well?

 tor arne

 Any updates about this?

 Cheers,
 jesus




 So we might be able to rename the existing one and ask github to pull
 our git.webkit.org http://git.webkit.org repository into

 github/WebKit/webkit.
 Apparently Apache takes that way: https://github.com/apache
 The mirroring icon indicates kind of official-ness.

 I don't know how long their mirroring delay is, though.



 On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Tor Arne Vestbø
 tor.arne.ves...@digia.com mailto:tor.arne.ves...@digia.com wrote:

 On 11/28/12 16:55 , Adam Barth wrote:

 My sense is that the WebKit community would prefer that the
 hashes in
 GitHub match the hashes in git.webkit.org
 http://git.webkit.org so that folks can more

 easily move branches between the two.  For my part, I've
 switched over
 to using GitHub exclusive of git.webkit.org
 http://git.webkit.org, so the the difference in

 hashes aren't an issue for me, but I can understand why they'd be
 problematic for other people.


 Yepp, agreed. Let's switch it over.


 After the force-push, would you still be able to push updates
 automatically?  If so, you can switch the hashes whenever is
 convenient for you.  (It might be nice to announce the date/time
 on
 this list so that folks aren't taken by surprise.)


 The mirror is also pushed to http://gitorious.org/webkit/__webkit
 http://gitorious.org/webkit/webkit, which I was planning to keep

 as is for now, so that would mean setting up an extra mirroring for
 the non-author-rewritten history :/ Also, the server I run this on
 has a somewhat uncertain future. With that in mind it's probably
 easier to just push directly from the same import that's pushed to
 git.webkit.org http://git.webkit.org, and make the GitHub mirror

 an official mirror?

 tor arne

 _
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/__mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev





 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Changes to the WebKit2 development process

2013-01-09 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
Hi,

2013/1/8 Sam Weinig wei...@apple.com:
 Hello webkit-dev,

 We are making some changes to the development process for WebKit2. These 
 changes were announced to reviewers in advance, and I'd like to share them 
 with you now.

 WebKit2 has a core set of functionality that is valuable to all ports, and 
 then aspects that are only of limited/specialized interest. It is becoming 
 increasingly difficult to improve and advance the core functionality while 
 maintaining the more peripheral aspects. In addition, changes to the core 
 often require significant expertise to evaluate, for instance to ensure that 
 the security and responsiveness goals of WebKit2 are met.

Isn't that why we already differentiate between committers and
reviewers? I mean, isn't like that throughout the entire project
already? I thought _any_ patch to any part of WebKit required
significant expertise to be evaluated.


 The changes are:

 1) WebKit2 now has owners. Only owners should review WebKit2 patches. While 
 we do not want to apply this concept across the whole WebKit project at this 
 time, for WebKit2 it is appropriate. The list of owners is documented in the 
 Owners file at the WebKit2 top level directory, and in committers.py.

If I'm not mistaken, there are only people from the Mac port in the
OWNERS file. Will there be some policy that other reviewers from other
ports can become owners of WebKit2 as well, or will that be
Apple-only always?


 2) Ports must keep themselves building. Non Apple Mac ports, if broken by 
 core functionality changes to WebKit2, are now responsible for fixing 
 themselves. We have asked those who run the EWS bots to make sure that 
 failing to build WebKit2 does not block the commit queue from committing.

IMHO, doing this is breaking down an entire 'culture' of the WebKit
workflow that we are all so proud of.


 3) Over time, owners may remove peripheral functionality from the main 
 WebKit2 directory, such as support for features that aren't broadly 
 applicable. We will not do this immediately, and we will work with ports that 
 are interested in such features to create appropriate, maintainable 
 general-purpose mechanisms that can be used to implement them outside of core 
 WebKit2 code.

 While we understand that this change will inconvenience some ports, we have 
 decided that forward progress of WebKit2 is a more important concern, and we 
 are moving forward with this change tonight.


Well, at least from my side, I only got this email _after_ you had
already moved forward with everything. I actually saw the patches
landing way before it. Not cool! :)

I thought the reviewers had all agreed about all these, but now after
the first round of replies to this thread it is sad to see that not
even among you guys there was a full settlement about this topic.

Cheers,
jesus


 - Sam
 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Github vs. git.webkit.org

2012-12-11 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
Hi,

2012/12/4 Tor Arne Vestbø tor.arne.ves...@digia.com:

 Bill, what do you think about pushing the official SVN import to GitHub as
 well?

 tor arne

Any updates about this?

Cheers,
jesus




 So we might be able to rename the existing one and ask github to pull
 our git.webkit.org http://git.webkit.org repository into

 github/WebKit/webkit.
 Apparently Apache takes that way: https://github.com/apache
 The mirroring icon indicates kind of official-ness.

 I don't know how long their mirroring delay is, though.



 On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Tor Arne Vestbø
 tor.arne.ves...@digia.com mailto:tor.arne.ves...@digia.com wrote:

 On 11/28/12 16:55 , Adam Barth wrote:

 My sense is that the WebKit community would prefer that the
 hashes in
 GitHub match the hashes in git.webkit.org
 http://git.webkit.org so that folks can more

 easily move branches between the two.  For my part, I've
 switched over
 to using GitHub exclusive of git.webkit.org
 http://git.webkit.org, so the the difference in

 hashes aren't an issue for me, but I can understand why they'd be
 problematic for other people.


 Yepp, agreed. Let's switch it over.


 After the force-push, would you still be able to push updates
 automatically?  If so, you can switch the hashes whenever is
 convenient for you.  (It might be nice to announce the date/time
 on
 this list so that folks aren't taken by surprise.)


 The mirror is also pushed to http://gitorious.org/webkit/__webkit
 http://gitorious.org/webkit/webkit, which I was planning to keep

 as is for now, so that would mean setting up an extra mirroring for
 the non-author-rewritten history :/ Also, the server I run this on
 has a somewhat uncertain future. With that in mind it's probably
 easier to just push directly from the same import that's pushed to
 git.webkit.org http://git.webkit.org, and make the GitHub mirror

 an official mirror?

 tor arne

 _
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/__mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev





 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Github vs. git.webkit.org

2012-11-29 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
2012/11/28 Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org:
 My sense is that the WebKit community would prefer that the hashes in
 GitHub match the hashes in git.webkit.org so that folks can more
 easily move branches between the two.  For my part, I've switched over
 to using GitHub exclusive of git.webkit.org, so the the difference in
 hashes aren't an issue for me, but I can understand why they'd be
 problematic for other people.

 After the force-push, would you still be able to push updates
 automatically?  If so, you can switch the hashes whenever is
 convenient for you.  (It might be nice to announce the date/time on
 this list so that folks aren't taken by surprise.)

 Thanks for letting us use your mirror.  I've found it very useful to
 be able to push work-in-progress branches to GitHub to share with
 folks.

+1.
If we are all set about this, it would be awesome if we could move on
with it, Tor Arne!
This would also avoid some extra work for Gergely Kis, I guess...

cheers,
jesus
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] We should rename layoutTestController to testController

2012-05-31 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
2012/5/31 Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org:
 testController seems fine to me. I agree it's an improvement.

 On the other hand there are other tasks that have more benefit in terms of
 code maintenance for people wanting to spend time working in this area. A
 couple ideas:

 Move more APIs that only depend WebCore code to internals. Reduces code
 duplication and complexity.

Just a heads-up: there is a meta bug tracking this at
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=87284 .

A few folks have been going through the list created during the
hackathon (https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/Internals_Hackathon) and
picking a method to port every now and then.

We were following the
if-it-depends-only-on-WebCore-code-it-should-be-moved idea quite
strictly, but now it seems we are facing a trade-off about internals x
private WebKit APIs/SPIs from a few ports being tested. In other
words, a few methods from layoutTestController are also testing code
(private?) from WebKit and moving them to internals can leave these
untested... For Qt I'm removing private methods that were only used by
DRT or WTR, but I can't make this decision for other ports.

Anyway, if you know something that can be moved for sure, just open a
bug blocking b87284 and I'm quite sure there will be people happy to
work on it.

Cheers,
jesus


 Work on exposing things like eventSender through an NPAPI plugin. That way
 it can be shared across browser vendors and could be used by the W3C test
 harness as well. This would be for APIs that we want for testing but don't
 make sense to expose to the web.

 Ojan

 On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:

 I am thinking we should rename layoutTestController to testController. Or
 if you don’t like that name, maybe testHarness or some even better name.

 The old name is too long and the word “layout” is so strange.

 We could expose the object under the new name and the old one, and then
 over time convert all the tests to the new name, then get rid of the old
 one.

 What do you all think?

 -- Darin
 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev



 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] We should rename layoutTestController to testController

2012-05-31 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
2012/5/31 Dan Bernstein m...@apple.com:

 On May 31, 2012, at 12:11 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:

 On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:

 I am thinking we should rename layoutTestController to testController. Or
 if you don’t like that name, maybe testHarness or some even better name.


 testController seems like a misnomer since it doesn't really control the
 test itself. I would prefer testRunnerController or simply testRunner since
 it's quite self-evident that methods on testRunner would act on the test
 runner itself.


 I like the name testRunner.

I like it too.






 We could expose the object under the new name and the old one, and then
 over time convert all the tests to the new name, then get rid of the old
 one.


 That sounds like a good idea.

 Can we also rename LayoutTests to RegressionTests? I know Dave (Hyatt)
 suggested to cleanup the render tree dump format to get rid of all hacks and
 tweaks we've added over years, and my preference is to combine all these
 efforts and put new types of tests in trunk/RegressionTests. We'll move
 tests from LayoutTests to RegressionTests as we convert. We'll get rid of
 LayoutTests directory once all tests have been converted to use testRunner
 and new render tree dump format.

 - Ryosuke

 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev



 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


[webkit-dev] Moving methods from layoutTestController to window.internals (was We should rename layoutTestController to testController)

2012-05-31 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
2012/5/31 Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org:
 Darin, sorry for derailing this thread. I suppose I should have changed the
 subject. :)

Fixed. :)


 On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Jesus Sanchez-Palencia je...@webkit.org
 wrote:

 We were following the
 if-it-depends-only-on-WebCore-code-it-should-be-moved idea quite
 strictly, but now it seems we are facing a trade-off about internals x
 private WebKit APIs/SPIs from a few ports being tested. In other
 words, a few methods from layoutTestController are also testing code
 (private?) from WebKit and moving them to internals can leave these
 untested... For Qt I'm removing private methods that were only used by
 DRT or WTR, but I can't make this decision for other ports.


 If any of these involve the Chromium port, I'm sure we'd be happy to
 accommodate whatever is needed to move the API to internals. Feel free to CC
 me on bugs where that's the case.

Good to know, thanks!
It would be nice if people from other ports could also raise their
hands as well so we don't bother the wrong ones.

By the way, following the meta bug I could see that there are a few
patches needing some care from reviewers, guys!

Cheers,
jesus




 Anyway, if you know something that can be moved for sure, just open a
 bug blocking b87284 and I'm quite sure there will be people happy to
 work on it.

 Cheers,
 jesus


  Work on exposing things like eventSender through an NPAPI plugin. That
  way
  it can be shared across browser vendors and could be used by the W3C
  test
  harness as well. This would be for APIs that we want for testing but
  don't
  make sense to expose to the web.
 
  Ojan
 
  On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:
 
  I am thinking we should rename layoutTestController to testController.
  Or
  if you don’t like that name, maybe testHarness or some even better
  name.
 
  The old name is too long and the word “layout” is so strange.
 
  We could expose the object under the new name and the old one, and then
  over time convert all the tests to the new name, then get rid of the
  old
  one.
 
  What do you all think?
 
  -- Darin
  ___
  webkit-dev mailing list
  webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
  http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
 
 
 
  ___
  webkit-dev mailing list
  webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
  http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
 


___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] New Qt-WK2 EWS

2012-03-07 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 6:08 AM, Osztrogonac Csaba o...@inf.u-szeged.hu wrote:
 Hi WebKittens,

 Today morning we started a new EWS to help your WebKit2 development.
 It is a build only EWS, which builds QtWebKit (WK1 and WK2 too) with
 the latest stable Qt5 hash which is used by all QtWebKit developer.

This is great, thanks!
Are you planning to add a post-commit buildbot anytime soon as well,
so we can catch layout and api test regressions?

Cheers,
jesus



 The new EWS can be found here: http://queues.webkit.org/ and
 you will see its results on bugzilla's qt-wk2 status bubble.
 (After it finished testing the long initial r? queue)

 If you would like to reproduce its result locally, you need the latest
 stable Qt5. You can find its hash and the script I used to build Qt5 here:
 - https://github.com/ossy-szeged/qt5-tools/blob/master/build-qt5-env
 - https://github.com/ossy-szeged/qt5-tools/blob/master/build-qt5.sh

 br,
 Ossy
 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Introducing run-perf-tests and Adding Performance Bots

2012-03-01 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
A Qt WebKit1 performance bot was added last week, sorry for the late
announcement.

If I'm not mistaken, currently run-perf-tests works with DRT only, but
what if we would like to make it work with WTR as well so we could
also have WebKit2 performance bots running? I'm not aware of the
infrastructure provided by webkitpy (Drivers, etc) so I'm not sure
about the amount of work needed...

Cheers,
jesus

On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
 FYI, I've added a wiki page describing how to write a new perf.
 test: https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/Writing%20Performance%20Tests

 On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org wrote:

 On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:

 I didn't merge it into run-webkit-tests because performance tests don't
 pass/fail but instead give us some values that fluctuate over time. While
 Chromium takes an approach to hard-code the rage of acceptable values, such
 an approach has a high maintenance cost and prone to problems such as having
 to increase the range periodically as the score slowly degrades over time.
 Also, as you can see on Chromium perf bots, the test results tend to
 fluctuate a lot so hard-coding a tight range of acceptable value is tricky.


 While this isn't perfect, I still think it's worth doing.


 I'm afraid that the maintenance cost here will be too high. Values will
 necessarily depend on each bot so we'll need number of tests×number of
 bots expectations, and I don't think people are enthusiastic about
 maintaining values like that over time (even I don't want to do that
 myself).

 Turning the bot red when a performance test fails badly is helpful for
 finding and reverting regressions quickly, which in turn helps identify
 smaller regressions more easily (large regressions mask smaller ones).


 I agree. Maybe we can obtain the historical average and standard deviation
 and turn bots red if the value doesn't fall within some value between 1 and
 2 standard deviations.

 In either case, we have to get the bots running the tests and work on
 getting reliable data first.


 After http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/106211, values for most tests have
 gotten very stable. They tend to vary within 5% range.

 - Ryosuke


 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Introducing run-perf-tests and Adding Performance Bots

2012-03-01 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
I have opened the
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Žan Doberšek zandober...@gmail.com wrote:
 To get WKTR running the performance tests a '-2' switch must be added to
 PerfTestRunner and some refactoring is required in the WKTR itself to
 properly handle the '--no-timeout' switch when given.

 I've got a diff of these changes laying around I can transform into a patch
 if there isn't one yet, just point me to a bug (or let's create one).

I have opened bug https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80042 . Can
you assign it to yourself?

Best regards,
jesus



 Best,
 Zan



 Cheers,
 jesus

 On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
  FYI, I've added a wiki page describing how to write a new perf.
  test: https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/Writing%20Performance%20Tests
 
  On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org wrote:
 
  On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
 
  I didn't merge it into run-webkit-tests because performance tests
  don't
  pass/fail but instead give us some values that fluctuate over time.
  While
  Chromium takes an approach to hard-code the rage of acceptable values,
  such
  an approach has a high maintenance cost and prone to problems such as
  having
  to increase the range periodically as the score slowly degrades over
  time.
  Also, as you can see on Chromium perf bots, the test results tend to
  fluctuate a lot so hard-coding a tight range of acceptable value is
  tricky.
 
 
  While this isn't perfect, I still think it's worth doing.
 
 
  I'm afraid that the maintenance cost here will be too high. Values will
  necessarily depend on each bot so we'll need number of tests×number
  of
  bots expectations, and I don't think people are enthusiastic about
  maintaining values like that over time (even I don't want to do that
  myself).
 
  Turning the bot red when a performance test fails badly is helpful for
  finding and reverting regressions quickly, which in turn helps identify
  smaller regressions more easily (large regressions mask smaller ones).
 
 
  I agree. Maybe we can obtain the historical average and standard
  deviation
  and turn bots red if the value doesn't fall within some value between 1
  and
  2 standard deviations.
 
  In either case, we have to get the bots running the tests and work on
  getting reliable data first.
 
 
  After http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/106211, values for most tests
  have
  gotten very stable. They tend to vary within 5% range.
 
  - Ryosuke
 
 
  ___
  webkit-dev mailing list
  webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
  http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
 
 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] *.webkit.org is down

2012-01-19 Thread Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
It's back! :)

cheers,
jesus

On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:26 PM, William Siegrist wsiegr...@apple.comwrote:

 I think you have the same problem as Gustavo. His email to webkit-dev
 seems to imply a problem in between Brazil and webkit.org.

 -Bill


 On Jan 19, 2012, at 2:00 PM, Alexis Menard wrote:

  Hi,
 
  I can't also access from home : IP - 186.215.1.122
 
  Thanks.
 
  On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 6:05 PM, William Siegrist wsiegr...@apple.com
 wrote:
  If you are still having trouble access the site, send me your IP
 address and
  I will see if its anything on the server.
 
  -Bill
 
 
 
 
  On Jan 19, 2012, at 12:34 PM, Jesus Sanchez-Palencia wrote:
 
  I'm also in Brazil and I can confirm it doesn't work for me as well.
 
  I guess kov is also in Brazil and I just saw him mentioning on IRC that
   both bugs.webkit.org and git.webkit.org are timing out...
 
  Cheers,
  Jesus
 
  On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Philip Rogers p...@google.com wrote:
 
  http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/
 
  (It's up for me too).
 
 
  On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Jarred Nicholls jar...@webkit.org
  wrote:
 
  On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Alexis Menard
  alexis.men...@openbossa.org wrote:
 
  Hi,
 
  It seems that *.webkit.org are down (bugs.webkit.org,
 trace.webkit.org,
  …).
 
 
  I can confirm here in Maryland, USA that www, bugs, trac, etc. are all
  up.
 
 
 
  Here in Brazil we can't access to any of them. I tried two different
  internet providers with their own DNS and I even tried google DNS
 with no
  luck.
 
 
  Might you try OpenDNS?  208.67.222.222/208.67.220.220
 
 
  Talking to some people in #webkit it seems that not everyone is
 affected
  (maybe only people outside US?).
 
  Anyone who knows where the servers sits would mind to have a look at
  them?
 
  Thank you very much.
  ___
  webkit-dev mailing list
  webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
  http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
 
 
 
  ___
  webkit-dev mailing list
  webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
  http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
 
 
 
  ___
  webkit-dev mailing list
  webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
  http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
 
 
  ___
  webkit-dev mailing list
  webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
  http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
 
 
 
  ___
  webkit-dev mailing list
  webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
  http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
 
 
 
 
  --
  Alexis Menard (darktears)
  Software Engineer
  INdT Recife Brazil


___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev