Memory Usage on Perfherder & Memory Reduction

Hi All, Recently Geoff Brown landed an AWSY-like system [1] for tracking memory usage on Perfherder. This is awesome. It's one of my pinned tabs. I was happy to see two recent "drops" in memory usage: 1. A ~3% drop in "Resident Memory Tabs closed [+30s]", likely due to Bug 990916 which expires d

Re: Requiring a try job prior to autolanding to inbound

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Adam Roach wrote: > On 1/22/16 06:12, Daniel Minor wrote: > >> Another difference is that sheriffs require a try run before they will >> land >> a patch flagged "checkin-needed." In Bug 1239281 we're proposing to >> implement this requirement for autolanding. >> >

Re: about:profiles and the new profile manager

As work on this feature continues, I think we want to block the code and UI from shipping in Firefox for Android. Can you look into ways to stop the toolkit code, strings and UI from getting packaged for Android? On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Andrea Marchesini wrote: > Hi all, > > This week

Re: APZ enabled on Fennec nightly

Awesome! Thanks to the team that made this happen. (CC'ing dev-mobile-firefox too) On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Kartikaya Gupta wrote: > Hi all, > > Just a heads up that I landed the patch to enable APZ on Fennec > (nightly channel only for now). It should be in the Dec 1 nightly and > onw

Re: Now measuring Firefox size per-commit. What else should we be tracking?

I also think measuring build times, and other build related stats, would be useful. I'd like to see Mozilla capturing those stats for developer builds though. I'm less interested in build times for the automation. That data is already looked at by the automation team. Build stats for developers is

Re: Intent to Ship: 3rd Party Install Tracking

Valid point On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 9:22 AM, Robert Kaiser wrote: > Mark Finkle schrieb: > >> and maybe we should use it >> for the FHR persistent ID since it's the same across installs and >> profile-resets >> > > I think it's a *very* b

Re: Intent to Ship: 3rd Party Install Tracking

On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 2:49 PM, wrote: > > It seems to me that when doing something as privacy sensitive as this we > should probably figure out exactly what data we want to collect *first*. > Then, if and only if we can't collect it using in-house code, we should > consider going with a third p

Re: Intent to Ship: 3rd Party Install Tracking

On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 2:49 PM, wrote: > On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 at 2:29:32 PM UTC-4, Mark Finkle wrote: > > There are good reasons for wanting to collect the data. Our marketing and > > growth goals for 2015 will require spending non-trivial amounts of money. > >

Intent to Ship: 3rd Party Install Tracking

We wanted to start some transparency around a new integration coming to Firefox on Mobile [1]. We are planning to integrate a 3rd party install tracking SDK from a company called Adjust [2] which will send data, possibly device identity data [3], to a 3rd party server. We don't do this very much at

Re: prebuilt libraries?

- Original Message - > On 11/26/14 6:55 PM, Philip Chee wrote: > > On 27/11/2014 00:03, Gregory Szorc wrote: > > > >> Yes, people on this list generally care about C++. However, there is > >> a very large group - most of the Firefox Team and a large amount of > >> Firefox OS developers - w

Re: Is it time for mochitest-chrome on Android and B2G

Fennec/Android does have the ability to run xpcshell-like tests. These tests are JS scripts loaded into a framework that simulates the xpcshell system. Technically it's not xpcshell though. The JS script is loaded into tab of the Fennec browser. If the JS script knows this, it can create a moch

Re: Intent to Implement: Web Activities for Android

- Original Message - > When you say "intent to implement" what is it you're planning on > implementing? > * web activities between b2g-style webapps on Android Yes > * web activities called by sites loaded in the Firefox for Android browser? > * web activities provided by sites loaded i

Re: Terminating xulrunner?

- Original Message - > > I don't know. Maybe building an SDK based on Firefox is the right > > thing; honestly, I just want something that works. But I put a lot of > > effort into this over the last two years. > FWIW, I packaged xulrunner in Debian in 2006 and have been maintaining > it

Re: Terminating xulrunner?

Your proposal sounds somewhat similar to the way the webapprt is being delivered too. I think that's a good thing. - Original Message - > I propose that we just stop pretending, and terminate xulrunner, > considering the following: > - Xulrunner is lagging behind Firefox: DLL block list

Re: Mozilla style guide issues, from a JS point of view

Agreed. In /mobile JS code we favor wrapping >80 characters. 100 seems reasonable to me. - Original Message - > I strongly prefer at least a 100 character per line limit. Technology > marches on. > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Karl Tomlinson wrote: > > L. David Baron writes: > > >

Re: Mozilla style guide issues, from a JS point of view

> One reason I've seen 2 preferred to 4 (apart from keeping line lengths > down) is that: > if (somethingHere() && > somethingElse()) > doSomething(); > is less clear about what's condition and what's body the if body is than: > if (somethingHere() && > somethingElse()) > doSomething(); Changin

Re: [webdev] Generic data update service?

Couldn't the add-on hotfix approach be used for some of these items? - Original Message - > On 12/07/13 18:20, Benjamin Smedberg wrote: > > I think the general concept of making more of our "lists" be dynamic is > > sound, but I'm very skeptical of the technical solution that you appear

Re: new build-time defines for controlling when features ship

> >> I've described the various defines here: > >> > >> https://wiki.mozilla.org/**Platform/Channel-specific_**build_defines > >> > > > > My understanding of this is that we were going to limit use of all > > of > > these options to

Re: The current state of Talos benchmarks

On 08/29/2012 07:32 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > In my experience, a lot of those emails say "there was a regression > caused by one of the following 100 patches", and I will have written 1 > of those patches. I usually ignore those ones (though it depends on > the nature of the patch). > >

Re: The current state of Talos benchmarks

On 08/29/2012 09:54 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > >> I agree with that if we talk about performance in general. But this >> thread is about specific regressions in performance as a result of >> changeset going into our tree. I don't think

Re: "Touch" or "Tablet"?

On 08/02/2012 09:32 AM, Gervase Markham 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. > > Dao suggests it would be nice to get cross-browser cons