Re: [dev-servo] How to efficiently react to an element changing visibility status from DOM code?

2016-06-21 Thread Patrick Walton
Note that WR is now keeping the DOM up to date with the current scroll offset (or at least as close to "up to date" as you can be with APZ) so this could reasonably be done DOM-side, I imagine. Patrick On Jun 17, 2016 4:02 AM, "Josh Matthews" wrote: > While listening to the Gecko platform talk a

Re: [dev-servo] Proposed work for upcoming sharing of Servo components with Firefox

2016-06-21 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 6/21/16 12:20 PM, Lars Bergstrom wrote: I'm still a bit worried about this unless the revert rate comes down pretty significantly for any shared branch between servo and gecko. That's fair. We should certainly not make inbound that shared branch! :) But we'll see how the proposals come

Re: [dev-servo] Proposed work for upcoming sharing of Servo components with Firefox

2016-06-21 Thread Lars Bergstrom
On Jun 21, 2016, at 8:39 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 6/21/16 8:34 AM, Lars Bergstrom wrote: >> If a backout lands as a `git revert` of the offending commit(s) I'm >> certainly less concerned, as that's annoying but not impossible for people >> to continue rebasing against. > > Right, that's

Re: [dev-servo] Proposed work for upcoming sharing of Servo components with Firefox

2016-06-21 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 6/21/16 8:34 AM, Lars Bergstrom wrote: If a backout lands as a `git revert` of the offending commit(s) I'm certainly less concerned, as that's annoying but not impossible for people to continue rebasing against. Right, that's how backouts land. The way it was explained to me (and I may h

Re: [dev-servo] Proposed work for upcoming sharing of Servo components with Firefox

2016-06-21 Thread James Graham
On 21/06/16 13:34, Lars Bergstrom wrote: On Jun 20, 2016, at 9:25 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: On 6/20/16 8:35 PM, Lars Bergstrom wrote: Backouts came up in the discussion, and I tried to make it pretty clear that they are not compatible with a GitHub-style development model (even if you *could*

Re: [dev-servo] Proposed work for upcoming sharing of Servo components with Firefox

2016-06-21 Thread Lars Bergstrom
On Jun 20, 2016, at 9:25 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > On 6/20/16 8:35 PM, Lars Bergstrom wrote: >> Backouts came up in the discussion, and I tried to make it pretty clear that >> they are not compatible with a GitHub-style development model (even if you >> *could* hypothetically do crazy things

Re: [dev-servo] Proposed work for upcoming sharing of Servo components with Firefox

2016-06-21 Thread Manish Goregaokar
My main issue is that backouts aren't addressed. They are reasonably common in m-c (admittedly, this was a few years ago; I haven't been watching Firefox dev lately) due to the model where tests run after merges. On the other hand, Servo's model never has backouts, and isn't well equipped to deal w