Hi everyone,
Here's the list of new issues found and filed by the Desktop Release QA
Team last week, January 16 - January 20 (week 3).
Additional details on the team's priorities last week, as well as the
plans for the current week are available at:
https://public.etherpad-mozilla.org/p/Desk
Hi all, so as not to leave this hanging:
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Axel Hecht wrote:
> Am 16/01/2017 um 21:43 schrieb Dave Townsend:
>
>>
>> What other features do we depend on in XUL that I haven't listed?
>>
>>
> Accessibility? Not sure how big the difference is there between XUL and
>
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Bobby Holley
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>
> > On 1/16/17 4:28 PM, Matthew N. wrote:
> >
> >> Does it just work from XHTML documents?
> >>
> >
> > Yes, as far as I know.
> >
> > Is our implementation of Web Components ready to
On 1/23/17 10:31 AM, David Bolter wrote:
Should (can) it die in the Quantum development timeframe?
In my opinion, no.
What does that do to shipping risk?
Makes it super-high.
I realize churn creates risk, but I seem to recall XBL
is getting in the way for Quantum styling?
Not as much as
sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN) is used a number of places in the tree to get
a core count for parallel algorithms. The web says that that phrase does
not really return the number of available cores on ARM Linuxish systems in
general, including Android - because the return value does not account for
On 23-01-17 17:27, Lars Hansen wrote:
> sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN) is used a number of places in the tree to get
> a core count for parallel algorithms. The web says that that phrase does
> not really return the number of available cores on ARM Linuxish systems in
> general, including Android -
Do we support Android on ARMv7 without NEON?
Does the answer differ for our different API level builds?
--
Henri Sivonen
hsivo...@hsivonen.fi
https://hsivonen.fi/
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/li
Are there any plans to support Aarch64 as a tier higher than tier-3?
For Android or the upcoming Aarch64 flavor of Windows 10 maybe?
--
Henri Sivonen
hsivo...@hsivonen.fi
https://hsivonen.fi/
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Do we support Android on ARMv7 without NEON?
>
Ralph Giles told me just a few days ago that yes, we support ARMv7 with and
without NEON. This is relevant to the Oxidation project.
I may have been incorrect; I'm CCing Ralph to verify or co
On 23-01-17 18:58, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Do we support Android on ARMv7 without NEON?
>
> Does the answer differ for our different API level builds?
I believe that as of currently, we do fully support this. All our code
that has NEON codepaths uses runtime detection for NEON presence. In the
pas
I've started an discussion about the arm64 windows version, but we don't
have any news/decision yet. We may need to for market reasons, but the cost
in terms of release engineering, release testing and to some extent feature
testing is not trivial.
I expect that Android arm64 is similar, but I don
On 23-01-17 19:21, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
> I expect that Android arm64 is similar, but I don't have any context at
> all: are aarch64 phones shipping or expected to ship?
Most new high end Android models are AArch64 AFAIK.
--
GCP
___
dev-platform ma
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Nicholas Alexander
wrote:
> Ralph Giles told me just a few days ago that yes, we support ARMv7 with and
> without NEON. This is relevant to the Oxidation project.
That is correct. We have bugs about dropping devices without NEON
(https://bugzil.la/1305815) but
AArch64 (ARMv8) has been shipping on Android phones since Q3 2014.
Wikipedia claims that the first Samsung phone to ship with it was the Note
4, we may see the Note 8 in market shortly after MWC. Having a look at
T-mobile's US offerings all the high and mid-teir Android phones are
AArch64. Some of
On 1/23/2017 1:00 PM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
Are there any plans to support Aarch64 as a tier higher than tier-3?
For Android or the upcoming Aarch64 flavor of Windows 10 maybe?
Is Google shipping a 64-bit Android emulator for aarch64 yet? Last I
knew, they only supported x86 for their 64-bit e
Since some discussions at the all-hands around audio sandboxing and
mtransport's blocking linux sandbox tightening, and discussions with the
necko team, I decided to explore the options available to us, before we
got too far down a path-of-least-resistance. The following is the
result of that anal
Yeah, we’re *so* going to start seeing bugs that are done entirely in emoji. I
don’t look forward to decoding them, although I’m sure they’ll be incredibly
clever and fun. :)
> On Jan 17, 2017, at 10:01 PM, Emma Humphries wrote:
>
> As the BMO team announced earlier, we're going to be allowin
On 23/01/2017 18:44, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
> If only we had some crossplatform runtime that abstracted such system
> specifics away from us
> (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=663970) then maybe we
> wouldn't have to re-fix the same bugs every 5 years.
On this topic, I've heard mu
It seems to me that the XUL to HTML transition is a big job that needs to be
done with care. Would it make sense to try to work toward additions to HTML
and/or additions of prefixed attributes and the like to add the needed
behaviors to HTML wherever possible before trying to hack out a transiti
Any time something is disabled or removed from ESR, please be sure the
developer docs team knows about it, because that’s something that has to be
reflected in our documentation. I’m not aware of many (if any) documentation
that says something exists in version X but not in ESR version X; that’s
We disabled some features (iirc Hello and Pocket) in ESR45. The preference
is to keep ESR inline with what's in the mainline release but we're also
supporting ESR on a best effort basis. I think the rationale in this thread
for disabling service workers and push in ESR52 makes sense if we're not
go
There are plans to move the js/src/threading primitives into MFBT, so I
don't think the core count is out of scope.
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Gabriele Svelto
wrote:
> On 23/01/2017 18:44, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
> > If only we had some crossplatform runtime that abstracted such syste
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Nicholas Alexander
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>>
>> Do we support Android on ARMv7 without NEON?
>
>
> Ralph Giles told me just a few days ago that yes, we support ARMv7 with and
> without NEON.
OK. That makes it impractical to
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Kevin Brosnan wrote:
> AArch64 (ARMv8) has been shipping on Android phones since Q3 2014.
Furthermore, the flagships all seem to have 4 GB of RAM now. It's not
clear to me if ARMv7 userland processes on AArch64 Android kernel get
2 GB or 3 GB of virtual address sp
On Monday, January 23, 2017 at 12:03:35 PM UTC-8, Eric Shepherd wrote:
> It seems to me, anyway, that the ideal solution would be to enhance HTML
> (ideally in the spec) with the features needed to build a full-fledged
> desktop UI. That would be fabulous not just for Firefox making the transitio
25 matches
Mail list logo
