On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:51 AM, L. David Baron wrote:
> Please reply to this thread if you think there's something we should
> say as part of this charter review, or if you think we should
> support or oppose it.
Perhaps I've missed something, but I feel like we never resolved the
security quest
We’ve evaluated the Metalhead proposal and decided not to proceed with it.
Metalhead proposed a really interesting architecture that could plug into
existing web frameworks to increase frame rates, however by by-passing the
DOM, the proposal had the potential to be misused to remove more of the
se
This attribute is not part of the FileAPI spec and it has been marked as
deprecated in bug 1048291 the 31st of May 2016.
It's currently used by the 0.01% of the pages:
https://telemetry.mozilla.org/new-pipeline/dist.html#!cumulative=0&end_date=2018-04-30&keys=__none__!__none__!__none__&max_channe
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:00 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:51 AM, L. David Baron wrote:
>> Please reply to this thread if you think there's something we should
>> say as part of this charter review, or if you think we should
>> support or oppose it.
>
> Perhaps I've miss
hi,
This is now over. Please contact Markus, Greg or myself if you find
anything not working properly after the switch.
Have a nice end of day !
--
Julien
Le 02/05/2018 à 16:50, Julien Wajsberg a écrit :
Hi,
Tomorrow we'll move perf-html.io to a new home.
As part of this switch we'll chan
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Emma Humphries wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We control enabling many features and changes to Firefox using preferences.
>
> Program and Release management as well as PI need a better view of this.
>
> We've written a new policy which you can read on our nascent bug-handling
On 5/3/18 12:18 PM, Nicholas Alexander wrote:
Not all features are feasible to ship behind feature flags.
I'm pretty sure the proposed policy isn't intended to change anything
regarding features that ship without associated feature flags, nor is it
trying to get more features to ship behind f
MozillaBuild 3.2 is a minor update to version 3.1.1 mostly focusing on
updating a few of the bundled components to newer versions.
https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/libraries/win32/MozillaBuildSetup-Latest.exe
Important changes since version 3.1.1:
* Updated Python2 to version 2.7.15 and Python3
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 11:57 AM, Adam Roach wrote:
> On 5/3/18 12:18 PM, Nicholas Alexander wrote:
>>
>> Not all features are feasible to ship behind feature flags.
>
>
> I'm pretty sure the proposed policy isn't intended to change anything
> regarding features that ship without associated feature
On 03/05/2018 00:57, Emma Humphries wrote:
To summarize, when you are releasing a feature that "rides behind a
flag", on the bug for the feature:
* set the behind-pref flag to +
* set the qa-verify flag to ?
* note the bug in the Firefox Feature Trello board
We expect qa-verify to be set to +
Boris Zbarsky writes:
> On 5/2/18 5:21 AM, Karl Tomlinson wrote:
>> [[AudioNode Lifetime]] https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues/1471
>
> I've read through that thread, but I'm still a little unclear on
> where thing stand. With the latest proposal, can there be
> observable situations
On Friday 2018-05-04 10:21 +1200, Karl Tomlinson wrote:
> Is having web specifications try to describe object lifetimes
> helpful, or is it just over-prescribing?
>
> Should specifications instead just focus on observable behavior,
> and leave it to implementations to optimize and to reclaim
> res
On Thursday 2018-05-03 08:56 +0200, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:42 AM, L. David Baron wrote:
> > Timed Text Working Group
> > https://www.w3.org/2018/04/proposed-tt-charter-2018.html
>
> What does
>
> # The Group is expected to produce annual updates for the Recommen
I read the threads you referenced and the latest spec, and I think you're
absolutely right about everything :-).
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:21 AM, Karl Tomlinson wrote:
> Thank you for taking a look, Boris. I'm quite unclear how any of
> the changes proposed in the [[March F2F resolution]] comme
On Thursday 2018-05-03 09:26 -0500, Tom Ritter wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:00 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:51 AM, L. David Baron wrote:
> >> Please reply to this thread if you think there's something we should
> >> say as part of this charter review, or if you
On 5/3/18 6:21 PM, Karl Tomlinson wrote:
I didn't understand why he was highlighting "order of object
tear-down", nor why he was implying that only "VERY fine-grained"
knowledge was a problem.
Alex, depending on whether he's speaking with his TAG hat or Google hat
on, is either trying to figur
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 2:07 AM, L. David Baron wrote:
> On the flip side, sensor APIs are offered by mobile (and to some
> degree desktop) operating systems and widely used by apps running on
> them, and there's clear demand for having them on the Web. So I
> think it seems worth having a clear v
17 matches
Mail list logo
