That's a good idea. Should we file a bug to do this?
Sincerely,
Jason Smith
Desktop QA Engineer
Mozilla Corporation
https://quality.mozilla.com
On 4/10/2013 5:14 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
On 4/10/2013 1:38 PM, Jason Smith wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Right now, when a landing occurs, my understa
Comments inline.
Sincerely,
Jason Smith
Desktop QA Engineer
Mozilla Corporation
https://quality.mozilla.com
On 4/10/2013 2:19 PM, Justin Lebar wrote:
Right now the status and tracking flags for a version get hidden when
that version becomes old. If we switched away from using
target
hat bugs that defects are worth verifying on X branch?
Knowing this, why not consider just using the status-flags purely to
track landings and let the team determine how to use target milestone?
Also, why not set the status-flag in general for the appropriate Firefox
release when a patch lands on tru
Sounds good to me.
Also to add in a piece of private feedback I received - SeaMonkey wants
to remain on the front page as there's a strong community behind it that
still works on that project.
Sincerely,
Jason Smith
Desktop QA Engineer
Mozilla Corporation
https://quality.mozilla.com
erall in comparison to other products on
the front page
- Mozilla Labs - Looks like an outdated Bugzilla product that may not have high
bug filing usage - probably does not need to be on the front page
--
Sincerely,
Jason Smith
Desktop QA Engineer
Mo
+dev-platform - as this would be relevant to dev-platform as well
Sincerely,
Jason Smith
Desktop QA Engineer
Mozilla Corporation
https://quality.mozilla.com
Original Message
Subject:Re: Help wanted: Contact sites about Firefox OS UA detection
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013
pport.
Sincerely,
Jason Smith
Desktop QA Engineer
Mozilla Corporation
https://quality.mozilla.org/
On 9/25/2012 5:22 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
On 24/09/12 20:06, Jason Smith wrote:
3. For v1, we probably need to still stick to the original plan for
the UA that does include Android in the U
On Sunday, September 23, 2012 6:02:35 PM UTC-7, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Benoit Jacob
> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > I would like to +1 on Henri's answer to make it clear that the outcome
>
> > of this thread is not quite a nod to go ahead.
>
>
>
> I'd upgrade yo
Reply on:
How are we planning to test this? We have seen bugs in obscure web
sites which use the name of a new DOM property for example, but it seems
to me like there is no easy way for somebody to verify that adding such
a property doesn't break any popular website, even, since sometimes the
bug
esting for
X purpose (e.g. web compatibility).
Thoughts?
Sincerely,
Jason Smith
Desktop QA Engineer
Mozilla Corporation
https://quality.mozilla.org/
On 8/10/2012 1:41 PM, Anthony Hughes wrote:
Sorry, this should have went to dev-platform...
- Original Message -
From: "Anthony Hughes"
On Thursday, August 2, 2012 7:09:43 AM UTC-7, Lawrence Mandel wrote:
> > http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2012/07/12/ie10-user-agent-string-update.aspx
>
> >
>
> > IE10 has introduced the Touch token to the UA string, which overlaps
>
> > in
>
> > intent with our Tablet token.
>
> >
>
> >
11 matches
Mail list logo
