On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Ehsan Akhgari
> wrote:
>> On 2015-10-29 7:21 PM, Carlos Valim Coragem wrote:
>>>
>>> It seems that this problem only happens in the desktop version and not
>>> in
>>> mobile, I just did a test with the sam
Note that I'm looking for a way to track this across the entire process,
not a single document. I'd rather avoid having to track all documents
(both XUL and HTML) in the process if I can find a simpler solution.
On 30/10/15 01:18, Brian Birtles wrote:
> For CSS animations/transitions (not includin
Yes, that's also my guess. I'd appreciate if someone could confirm that.
Also, I haven't found a public API for this, so I'm digging in the
source of the refresh driver, and I haven't found confirmation yet.
Cheers,
David
On 30/10/15 02:33, Karl Tomlinson wrote:
> David Rajchenbach-Teller writes
Recall that I'm not interested in measuring all latency, only (for the
time being) latency caused by JS code executing on the main thread or
waiting for a CPOW. This simplifies a lot the implementation (when I
execute JS code, I just need to check whether I'm currently dealing with
a user-issued ev
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> On 2015-10-29 7:21 PM, Carlos Valim Coragem wrote:
>>
>> It seems that this problem only happens in the desktop version and not
>> in
>> mobile, I just did a test with the same webpage in version 34.0.1 of
>> Firefox to Android and it wor
David Rajchenbach-Teller writes:
> To improve the Performance Stats API, I'm looking for a way to find out
> if we are currently animating something on the main thread.
>
> My definition of animating is pretty large, i.e. "will the user probably
> notice if some computation on the main thread last
On 2015-10-29 9:47 AM, David Rajchenbach-Teller wrote:
The main thread of the current chrome/content process.
Indeed, animations are one of my two use cases, the other one being
user-input latency, but I'm almost sure I know how to deal with the latter.
Out of curiosity, how are you planning t
On 2015-10-29 7:21 PM, Carlos Valim Coragem wrote:
It seems that this problem only happens in the desktop version and not in
mobile, I just did a test with the same webpage in version 34.0.1 of
Firefox to Android and it worked!
Your experience is expected. We have an implementation of these
Carlos Valim Coragem schrieb:
I asked this same question on channel #mozilla-br on IRC, a mozillian
gave me this link: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1069609 -
the bug was opened on 09-18-2014, the last comment was day 07-24-2015,
wondering if there was any progress on that.
ht
On 2015/10/30 0:57, David Rajchenbach-Teller wrote:
On 29/10/15 16:32, Benoit Girard wrote:
We've explored several different ways of measuring this. Several of
these are in the tree. Generally what I have found the most useful is to
measure how we're servicing the content' main thread. This meas
Hi my friends!
I'm not sure where I can ask this question, so I'm sorry in advance :P
I'm having trouble using the attributes in the : date, time, week,
month and datetime - in Firefox.
During a class in college, last Tuesday, the teacher taught HTML elements
when several students, including
Seems like this kind of died. I still would like to see this happening. Is
this on somebody's agenda?
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Tom Schuster wrote:
> I see 3 (now 4) old pull requests that are unmerged.
>
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Anthony Ricaud wrote:
>
>> On 16/07/15 21:26, An
On 2015-10-29 1:10 PM, vladi...@mozilla.com wrote:
On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 9:39:57 PM UTC-4, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
First things first, congratulations on getting this close!
What's the status of the specification? I just had a quick skim and it
seems extremely light on details.
The spe
We've temporarily disabled generation of partial updates for Nightly and
Dev-Edition (Aurora) versions of Firefox.
Given that Dev-Edition updates are currently frozen as part of our uplift
process, the main impact of this is on Nightly users.
We hope to have partial update generation re-enabled i
On 10/29/15 1:10 PM, vladi...@mozilla.com wrote:
The intent to ship here is a bit premature; the intent is to pref it on in nightly
& aurora, not ship it all the way to release.
OK. The patches in the "enable it" bugs are enabling on all branches;
we should probably scale that back to just !
On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 9:39:57 PM UTC-4, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> First things first, congratulations on getting this close!
>
> What's the status of the specification? I just had a quick skim and it
> seems extremely light on details.
The spec is still a draft, and the API is expected to
On Wednesday, October 28, 2015 at 11:38:26 AM UTC-4, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 26/10/15 19:19, Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert wrote:
> > As of Oct 29, 2015 I intend to turn WebVR on by default for all
> > platforms. It has been developed behind the dom.vr.enabled preference.
> > A compatible API has bee
On 29/10/15 16:32, Benoit Girard wrote:
> We've explored several different ways of measuring this. Several of
> these are in the tree. Generally what I have found the most useful is to
> measure how we're servicing the content' main thread. This measurement
> is great because its measures how respo
We've explored several different ways of measuring this. Several of these
are in the tree. Generally what I have found the most useful is to measure
how we're servicing the content' main thread. This measurement is great
because its measures how responsive Firefox is not only for
scrolling/animatio
I'm also commented in the bug:
If we're doing uplifts, I'm not sure we're winning by uplifting
pre-landed strings.
Either way, I think the risk assessment of the patch should be that of
the actual patch that uses the strings, not "just adding strings".
Also, I'd appreciate an ETA for the pa
The main thread of the current chrome/content process.
Indeed, animations are one of my two use cases, the other one being
user-input latency, but I'm almost sure I know how to deal with the latter.
Cheers,
David
On 29/10/15 14:32, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
> On the main thread of which process
On the main thread of which process?
Please consider non-"animation" use-cases. In particular, users do
notice the latency of typing into edit boxes as much as anything else.
So let's make sure that editing latency triggers this as much as a
current animation.
--BDS
On 10/29/2015 9:14 AM, D
To improve the Performance Stats API, I'm looking for a way to find out
if we are currently animating something on the main thread.
My definition of animating is pretty large, i.e. "will the user probably
notice if some computation on the main thread lasts more than 32ms".
Do we have a reliable w
Please request the uplift. Under specific circumstances (like this one), we
take string changes in aurora.
Thanks
Sylvestre
Le 29/10/2015 13:39, Masatoshi Kimura a écrit :
> I missed two commits for 44 branch.
> https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=fx-team&revision=6b3c99e54177
> Uplift re
I missed two commits for 44 branch.
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=fx-team&revision=6b3c99e54177
Uplift requests will not help because they are string changes.
On 2015/10/29 5:10, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Because we want to synchronize the release of 42 and 44 devedition (n
Le 29/10/2015 02:11, Ehsan Akhgari a écrit :
> On 2015-10-28 4:10 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Because we want to synchronize the release of 42 and 44 devedition (next
>> Tuesday),
>> we are planning to perform the merge tomorrow, Thursday.
>> As a consequence, nightly = 45, aurora =
Thanks for this Blake.
Somewhat related: for those of you using ESLint, I recently filed a bug to
create a new custom ESLint rule that should help automatically detect CPOW
usage in tests: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1218412
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 12:44 AM, Blake Kaplan wrote:
27 matches
Mail list logo
