Increment a value in localStorage?
-kg
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Kyle Huey wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Henrik Skupin wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > A crashtest for WebRTC requires to reload the current page. So that can
> > be done by window.location.reload(). Sadly this will ca
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Henrik Skupin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A crashtest for WebRTC requires to reload the current page. So that can
> be done by window.location.reload(). Sadly this will cause an infinite
> loop when run in the automation. So which practice do we have to set a
> flag once the
Hi,
A crashtest for WebRTC requires to reload the current page. So that can
be done by window.location.reload(). Sadly this will cause an infinite
loop when run in the automation. So which practice do we have to set a
flag once the window has been reloaded once? Are there any guides how to
do it?
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Mounir Lamouri wrote:
> MOZ_UPDATE_CHANNEL contains a string and AFAIK, we can't use C
> preprocessor to compare strings so it might not be enough.
The common solution is to check MOZ_UPDATE_CHANNEL in the Makefile to
adjust defined variables, see e.g.:
http://mxr
On 14/11/12 19:27, Gavin Sharp wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Mounir Lamouri wrote:
>> For that, we will need some tools to know if we are building for Release
>> (and let say Beta) where the feature should be hidden by default, with
>> opposition to Aurora, Nightly or custom builds wh
On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 10:53:37 AM UTC-8, Alex Keybl wrote:
> Discussions are ongoing as to whether disabling the test is our
> best path forward here, given engineering opposition to disabling
> PGO.
I strongly recommend disabling the test for 32-bit Linux PGO and moving on. Bug
79929
On 11/14/12 3:58 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
Surely there are other ways to
help sites do whatever it is they want to do?
If we froze the UA, they'd just use other detection methods, and we'd be
having the same discussion about changing what some JS API returns.
Sure, but I think we're better
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Mounir Lamouri wrote:
> For that, we will need some tools to know if we are building for Release
> (and let say Beta) where the feature should be hidden by default, with
> opposition to Aurora, Nightly or custom builds where the feature should
> be enabled by defa
On 11/13/12 5:22 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
Let me try to be more clear. Assuming that the assertion that the bug
in question is not caused by the PGO compiler miscompiling, turning off
PGO in order to move on would be the wrong thing to do. If it's only
affecting a single test, then that test s
> The majority of our Linux users also do not use any of our builds or even use
> the same compiler as we do. By above logic we should completely stop doing
> Linux builds, but that's clear not a good idea :)
An attempt at getting closer to building what our Linux users use on a daily
basis is
On 06/11/12 13:31, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Therefore, I propose that we adopt the following policy:
> 1) APIs that are not ready for use by Web developers shall not be
> shipped on the release channel (unless preffed off).
For that, we will need some tools to know if we are building for Release
(a
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 05:22:22PM -0800, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> On 2012-11-13 5:03 PM, Justin Dolske wrote:
> >On 11/13/12 4:34 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> >
> >>But the point here is that unless we know for sure that we're dealing
> >>with a compiler bug, disabling Linux PGO builds may just wallpa
Gervase Markham schrieb:
A) Use "Touch" to indicate "has a touch-sensitive screen (and is not
already marked 'Mobile')".
IMHO, this should really be detected via a media query or something like
that. Feature detection with the UA string is a bad habit which we
shouldn't encourage, I think.
On 12/11/12 17:25, Kevin Brosnan wrote:
On mobile Chrome leaks the device name in the UA this is the current
method of hardware feature detection on the Android stock browser as
well.
OK. So given that we don't want to do that (we've rejected it twice
now), if this is the even-worse alternativ
On 12/11/12 16:36, jim.math...@gmail.com wrote:
I don’t see how this information will be of any use in deciding how
to present content, and will likely be used in the wrong way which
will break user experiences.
We have a related situation with W3C touch event interfaces. Web
authors are using t
On 13/11/12 16:37, wjohnston2...@gmail.com wrote:
Just to be clear, this is NOT generally true in what I've seen.
Websites send dramatically different content to small screen devices,
but not to touch based ones or tablets.
I think this is an important question. Is there anywhere we can get som
On 12/11/12 23:29, Justin Dolske wrote:
The UA is such a disaster. I wish we'd just freeze the damn thing
already (or as close to as possible).
Hey, I'm not saying that I like having to revisit this as often as we
are! :-|
Surely there are other ways to
help sites do whatever it is they wan
On 12/11/12 16:49, Marcio Galli wrote:
Touch++, again. Same points I said in September.
Can you give us a reference?
Gerv, do you have an online place that captures the discussion?
You mean the Touch/Tablet discussion?
The reason
I ask this is my interest to really understand what is the
On 11/14/2012 10:27 AM, geno...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm a student and I realize a thesis about the geolocation with HTML5.
Especially about the Geolocation API standardized by W3C.
The current Firefox browser implements this function, it is describe here :
http://www.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/geo
I'm a student and I realize a thesis about the geolocation with HTML5.
Especially about the Geolocation API standardized by W3C.
The current Firefox browser implements this function, it is describe here :
http://www.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/geolocation/
But I need more detailed information. In
20 matches
Mail list logo
