Hi,
I'm trying to use a Qt-build of mozilla as an embedded web browser. I've
built mozilla for Qt from git sources and used a patched version of
mozembed as explained in [1]. I've already detected and fixed 2 issues in
mozilla sources, but now I've a problem with scrollbar rendering.
Scrollbars a
This week's MemShrink meeting will be brought to you by B2G
jsloader.reuseGlobal (now on Beta:)
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=810719
Note:
* New meeting room
The wiki page for this meeting is at:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Performance/MemShrink
Agenda:
* 64-bit Windows Builds
On Saturday 2012-11-24 18:06 -0800, Justin Dolske wrote:
> On 11/6/12 10:09 AM, Dave Townsend wrote:
> >We've had a policy requiring super-review for certain kinds of patches
> >for a long time. It's changed a couple of times but the current policy
> >(http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/reviewers.html)
This Thursday, November 29, at noon PST (20:00 UTC) in 10 Forward in
Mountain View and live on https://air.mozilla.org/, I hope to engage you
with a conversation on the Firefox/mozilla-central build system.
Topics covered include:
* Overview of the existing build system
* Why it's so slow
* Ho
On 11/6/2012 1:09 PM, Dave Townsend wrote:
We've had a policy requiring super-review for certain kinds of patches
for a long time. It's changed a couple of times but the current policy
(http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/reviewers.html) primarily requires
super-review for any patch that introduces
On 2012-11-26 7:17 AM, smaug wrote:
As a reviewer and someone who cares about "quality," this annoys me
because I know
it is something that could largely be solved through decent automation
and tools.
Yes. We certainly should have at least coding style checker, and uuid
update checker.
https:/
On 11/25/12 05:21 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
> I understand the concerns about developer efforts. Can we please
> re-enable these builds, stash them somewhere obscure so that no-one
> will ever unintentionally stumble across them, and slap a giant
> warning on them saying "no support, no promi
On 11/26/2012 05:51 AM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
On 11/25/12 7:29 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
On Monday 2012-11-26 04:21 +0100, Robert Kaiser wrote:
Justin Dolske schrieb:
I think we should consider jettisoning/rewriting that part of the
policy. It doesn't match what we've been doing in reality(*)
I believe that Nicholas' remark makes sense.
Also, regardless of the final decision, we need to at least communicate
some clear plans to the community. Explain why we had win64 nightlies
until now, why we have turned them off, and whether/when they will return.
Cheers,
David
On 11/25/12 11:21 P
On Monday, November 28, 2011 9:04:58 AM UTC-5, myut...@gmail.com wrote:
> I've chipped in my thoughts on Jpeg-XR on the bugzilla entry for it. But I'll
> add some food for thought here anyways.
>
>
>
> Some other advantages, which influenced the flash player teams decision to
> include flash,
10 matches
Mail list logo
