I know lots of people are very interested in the on-going project to
replace Splinter with a modern code-review tool. After a colourful
variety of setbacks, this project[1], based on Review Board[2], is very
nearly ready for initial deployment. I put up a preview screencast on
my blog[3] to give
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Robert O'Callahan
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> >> Looking at the API though, why is it based on Events rather than
> >> Promises?
> >
> >
> http://w3c.github.io/mediac
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> Looking at the API though, why is it based on Events rather than
>> Promises?
>
> http://w3c.github.io/mediacapture-image/#promise-extensions-to-imagecapture
That seems super stran
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> Ooh, that is great! Though surprisingly the API doesn't seem to have
> any support for focus or flash control? Was that intentionally left
> out?
>
I think it's just a case of not wanting the spec to get too far ahead of
implementations.
L
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>> What's the use case here? Note that in order to build even a
>> half-decent camera app just for taking selfies you need some amount of
>> control over of focus. For more advanced
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> What's the use case here? Note that in order to build even a
> half-decent camera app just for taking selfies you need some amount of
> control over of focus. For more advanced camera apps you also want
> control over backlight compensation,
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 2:15 AM, Alfredo Yang wrote:
> Summary:
> Allow web authors to take photo via gUM video track.
>
> Bug:
> Main tracking bug, https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=888177
>
> Spec:
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/dap/raw-file/default/media-stream-capture/ImageCapture.html
>
>
I've been steering the underlying
ICameraControl implementation (dom/camera) towards better support
for ImageCapture's usage model for a while.
If we can fill in support for the missing features we currently
use (see CameraCapabilities.webidl)
then I
Mike Hommey wrote:
I guess this comes from installing test files.
Is there a build target that just installs installable files? (Although
presumably unless you're using Windows they should probably be symlinks
in which case you don't need to reinstall them.)
--
Warning: May contain traces
It seems like this API addresses at least some of the use cases of our
Camera API for Firefox OS (things such as being able to display a
preview video stream, being able to adjust some picture quality
parameters, etc.).
I am wondering if you know how much of the Camera API use cases this is
g
On 2014-09-04, 2:03 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
On 2014-09-04, 1:37 AM, Botond Ballo wrote:
From: "Boris Zbarsky"
To: dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2014 1:24:58 AM
Subject: Re: PSA: ./mach build doesn't work rel
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> On 2014-09-04, 1:37 AM, Botond Ballo wrote:
>>>
>>> From: "Boris Zbarsky"
>>> To: dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
>>> Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2014 1:24:58 AM
>>> Subject: Re: PSA: ./mach build doesn't work reliably any
>>> longer
>>>
>>>
On 2014-09-03, 11:47 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 9/3/14, 6:53 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
|mach build binaries| suffices most of the time
It really doesn't for the use case of not building the world when you change
a header and w
On 2014-09-04, 1:37 AM, Botond Ballo wrote:
From: "Boris Zbarsky"
To: dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2014 1:24:58 AM
Subject: Re: PSA: ./mach build doesn't work reliably any longer
On 9/4/14, 12:51 AM, Joshua Cranmer 🐧 wrote:
It sounds to me like what you really w
On 2014-09-04, 4:42 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Tim Taubert wrote:
Chromium has had the WebCrypto API enabled by default since Crome 37,
which was released in late June 2014. Their implementation supports a
subset of the algorithms that we do, and has roughly th
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Tim Taubert wrote:
> Chromium has had the WebCrypto API enabled by default since Crome 37,
> which was released in late June 2014. Their implementation supports a
> subset of the algorithms that we do, and has roughly the same level of
> spec compliance. We expect t
16 matches
Mail list logo
