Docshell ownership and peer changes

Hello all, I am not going to be in a position to effectively own docshell code for the foreseeable future. Given that, I have made the following changes, effective immediately: 1) Olli Pettay and Nika Layzell are now co-owners of the docshell module. They will split responsibilities as the

Re: Module removal proposal: XBL

On 11/7/19 12:03 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: Given that, I would like to propose that we remove the module at https://wiki.mozilla.org/Modules/Core#XBL as well. This is now done. -Boris ___ governance mailing list governance@lists.mozilla.org https

Module removal proposal: XBL

Hello all, Thanks to the hard work of many people [1] the source for the XBL subsystem was removed from the Gecko tree earlier today [2]. Given that, I would like to propose that we remove the module at https://wiki.mozilla.org/Modules/Core#XBL as well. We could wait on this until XBL remov

Nika Layzell and Kyle Machulis are now docshell peers

Nika and Kyle have been doing all sorts of Fission-related work on docshell, and at this point they know it as well as anyone does. I have officially added them as peers at . Congratulations, Kyle and Nika! -Boris __

Re: Updating (or deprecating?) the modules wiki page

On 10/26/18 2:28 PM, Gabriele Svelto wrote: but here's a few names of people that I'm pretty sure aren't working on the components they're marked on anymore: All true. For the cases where we have stale peers but active owners we should ask said owners to clean up the peer lists. For the cas

Re: XPIDL module ownership

On 10/25/18 8:56 PM, Andrew McCreight wrote: As such, I propose making Nika the new module owner, with myself and Nathan Froyd as peers. Sounds good. -Boris P.S. I sent this back on October 25, but the governance NNTP gateway is juts blackholing everything. If you post via NNTP, your posts

Re: Proposal: Addressing the term “meritocracy” in the governance statement

On 6/1/18 7:36 PM, Emma Irwin wrote: I’ll ensure at least one panel question comes from what has been shared here - and if you can’t make it, you have my commitment to follow-up with you after that call with recordings - and maybe some proposed next steps for this discussion. How does that so

Re: Proposal: Addressing the term “meritocracy” in the governance statement

On 5/30/18 12:01 PM, Emma Humphries wrote: Let's add a fourth item to Henri's list on the role of authority/leadership/maintainership in OSS to elevate and sponsor the next generation of authority/leadership/maintainership, and to emphasize that the next generation of OSS leadership should come f

Re: Looking Glass addon experience should be stopped asap

On 12/19/17 3:04 PM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote: Injecting addons whether enabled or disabled into a set of users based on their geographic location is a privacy issue. Ah, I didn't realize this addon was injected based on geographic location. That said, it's a privacy issue only if the existence

Re: Looking Glass addon experience should be stopped asap

On 12/16/17 4:09 PM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote: Yes this is a privacy and ethical issue Benjamin, What, exactly, is the privacy issue? The addon involved does invade privacy in any way I am aware of (especially given that it does nothing at all, privacy-related or otherwise, unless a certain p

Re: Looking Glass addon experience should be stopped asap

On 12/16/17 3:35 PM, Jean-Bernard Marcon wrote: I am surprised nobody raised the issue already (maybe I missed the right channel) It's been raised, though not all the channels that it's been raised on are public. Note that the Looking Glass addon has been unshipped already, though that may

Docshell peer update

It is my pleasure to announce that Samael Wang is now a peer for the docshell module. It's good to have more people who know about session history. :) In addition to that, Justin Lebar and Christian Biesinger have moved to emeritus status for docshell. Though of course I wouldn't complain i

Re: ImageLib owners

On 3/29/17 10:42 AM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: Owner: Seth Fowler Peer(s): Brian Bondy, Jeff Muizelaar, Justin Lebar, Timothy Nikkel The reality is that Jeff and Timothy are owners/peers here, in some permutation. That was explicitly stated at the point when Seth left, iirc. Jeff, Timothy,

Re: Changes to etiquette.html in bugzilla.mozilla.org

On 1/10/17 5:00 AM, Gijs Kruitbosch wrote: - either their last N comments were tagged spam/abuse/abusive, or their first N comments were tagged spam/abuse/abusive Ah, ok. Those are the tags I expect to end up banning accounts, so that's good. -Boris _

Re: Changes to etiquette.html in bugzilla.mozilla.org

On 1/9/17 5:52 PM, Emma Humphries wrote: Yes, I posted about that last week to planet mozilla, and when we take the changes live, I'll talk about tagging at the Monday meeting. I could also take that post and cc it to the usual mailing lists. Please do! The Monday meeting is not very well atte

Re: Issues, meta-issues and transparency

Filipus, This is my last post in this thread, since it's pretty clear to me that this is going nowhere. But just on the off chance that you really are missing something instead of being willfully obtuse, I will try one last time. On 10/9/16 2:15 PM, Filipus Klutiero wrote: That is not even

Re: Issues, meta-issues and transparency

On 10/8/16 11:39 AM, Filipus Klutiero wrote: 2. The ticket in which I reported that bugs.mozilla.org allows tickets to be marked as both WONTFIX and resolved In Bugzilla, a bug can be in multiple states that indicate what work remains to be done on it: UNCONFIRMED, NEW, RESOLVED (and REOPE

Re: Handling of security bugs is flawed

On 2/10/16 6:08 AM, Rafael Gieschke wrote: I am sorry for having to write this email. Rafael, I'm also sorry you had to write this... There should have been someone watching this component, and I'm sorry there wasn't (largely because the relevant code is not really actively maintained, unfo

Re: Some people on Mozilla Reps have inappropriate City-State

On 5/26/15 3:40 PM, Mike Connor wrote: If they do that, it's not really different from me listing my location as New York state. It's more like you listing your location as "Washington, VA". At which point a Marylander would complain that the city of Washington is not part of Virginia (let's

Re: Some people on Mozilla Reps have inappropriate City-State

On 5/26/15 2:52 PM, Mike Connor wrote: So, I'm a little lost on how this concept solves the original problem here. A free-form field means these users could continue to identify as a part of Albania. It also means that we could then ask them to stop doing that without forcing them to identify

Re: Some people on Mozilla Reps have inappropriate City-State

On 5/25/15 11:43 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote: On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Mike Connor wrote: The origin of this thread was from a legacy entry that mis-identified Kosovo as a part of Albania. I don't think that passes any reasonable sniff test. And yet people clearly want to not change it.

Re: Some people on Mozilla Reps have inappropriate City-State

On 5/12/15 3:23 PM, Adam Roach wrote: It would be ISO's political statement That may technically be true, but is not necessarily true as a matter of perception. -Boris ___ governance mailing list governance@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.o

Re: Some people on Mozilla Reps have inappropriate City-State

On 5/12/15 3:00 PM, Adam Roach wrote: We should not be taking actions that make it look like Mozilla is trying to independently determine what is and what isn't a country. Then we should just make the "country" field here freeform and be done with it. Delegating this determination to a body

Re: Some people on Mozilla Reps have inappropriate City-State

On 5/12/15 12:45 PM, Fred Wenzel wrote: I filed the request for this over 3 years ago[1]. At the time, it did not go anywhere because ISO 3166 did not have a country code for Kosovo, and that part of product details deals with ISO codes. This state hasn't changed, the interim code "XK" that I su

Re: Some people on Mozilla Reps have inappropriate City-State

On 5/12/15 11:28 AM, Pierros Papadeas wrote: - Kosovo is not included in product-details as a Country. [2] Wait. Why not? This makes no sense to me. At least assuming this is meant to be a "list of countries Reps might live in". If it's not meant to be that, then we shouldn't be using it

Re: Mozilla values, FIFA and marketing

On 6/12/14, 9:14 AM, Reuben Morais wrote: Is all the controversy not getting any coverage in international media? I haven't seen much coverage in my spotty checks of the BBC or in the US mass media I glance at or listen to (NPR). I've seen some blogs talk about FIFA's issues, but not so much

Re: Mozilla and DRM

On 5/20/14, 11:19 PM, Jim wrote: We've tried to get that part standardized, and failed. Prove this claim. We explicitly requested the HTML working group to agree to take it on as a deliverable. They, and more importantly the other browser vendors involved, refused. Where is this claimed

Re: Mozilla and DRM

On 5/20/14, 10:59 PM, The Wanderer wrote: I would have expected that each module involved - Firefox, the sandbox, and the CDM - would be running as a separate process, with at least the last one nested inside the previous. I'm not sure what you mean by nesting one process inside the other. Wha

Re: Mozilla and DRM

On 5/20/14, 11:03 AM, The Wanderer wrote: If it is properly sandboxed, it should not be able to find out anything about the sandbox (== the host executable) except what the sandbox itself tells it A sandboxed process still have full access to its own address space, no? It may be restricted in

Re: Mozilla and DRM

On 5/18/14, 12:51 AM, Jim wrote: It does require that the JS component communicating with the CDM via the EME is a standard. Netflix might refuse to support this standard, but you could try. We've tried to get that part standardized, and failed. If you are sandboxing the CDM, and if the CDM o

Re: Mozilla and DRM

On 5/17/14, 8:37 PM, Jim wrote: I am still waiting for Mozilla to make the sandbox source code available There is no source code to make available yet, as far as I know; the announcement was made once the agreements were reached, and there hasn't been time to actually start implementing the s

Re: Mozilla and DRM

On 5/17/14, 7:30 PM, Jim wrote: Mozilla did not even put up a fight You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but I respectfully disagree. Three passing comments does not demonstrate any heart or fight. You have made more posts defending Mozilla's decision to implement the EME! I care a l

Re: Mozilla and DRM

On 5/16/14, 9:41 PM, Jim wrote: Henri seems rather hard to understand, but he seems to have promoted the EME in the end. There's a difference between "accepting" and "promoting". Did you ever make a statement on the EME? http://www.w3.org/Search/Mail/Public/advanced_search?keywords=drm&hdr-

Re: Mozilla and DRM

On 5/15/14, 6:01 AM, Jim wrote: Mozilla have supported the W3C and the EME all the way Uh... are you serious? The Mozilla people who are on the record speaking about this issue before today (me, Robert, Henri) come across that way to you? and are still a member of the W3C Yes, we were e

Re: Mozilla and DRM

On 5/15/14, 5:08 AM, Jim wrote: How does it meet the demands by content owners for robust DRM, while allowing the user to sandbox the CDM, and also not being tivoized which is not an option on Linux? I personally do not know. But I am told by people I trust (e.g. Henri), that this issue was c

Re: Mozilla and DRM

On 5/14/14, 8:23 PM, Jim wrote: What exactly has been negotiated? Some obvious bits that jumped out at me: * The CDM not having unmediated access to the network, the hard drive, or any other part of the user's computer. * The CDM being available on Linux. * The CDM not being able to track

Re: Mozilla and DRM

On 5/14/14, 1:37 PM, Rubén Martín wrote: Probably it was me, but the article wording was too complex and didn't summarize what Boris wrote: * Not shipping it by default (the CDM module). * Requiring explicit user content before downloading the CDM. * Insisting on a CDM that is sandboxed

Re: Mozilla and DRM

Rubén, thank you for starting this thread. As a caveat, what follows are all my personal opinions, not official Mozilla anything. First off, I'd like to say that I don't know anyone in the Mozilla project who is happy that we're ending up in a place where we feel like we have to do this to s

Re: Is Mozilla slow-walking this supposedly "open dialogue" forum?

On 4/20/14, 11:12 PM, Jay Garcia wrote: Joe, I have been posting to this group for a long time directly to the server and posts are not held, posted immediately. The mailing list is moderated. The newsgroup may not be, since there is no one trying to spam the newsgroup. -Boris _

Re: treatment of Brendan Eich

On 4/13/14 9:45 PM, jsabash wrote: On the contrary Boris, I'm a realist, and tend to think that folks mean what they say. Sure. And what Nick said is that he has several friends who are both non-homosexual and Firefox users. From this you seemed to extrapolate something about him not having

Re: treatment of Brendan Eich

On 4/13/14 8:54 PM, jsabash wrote: In case it isn't. I hope you realize how far outside the norm your perspective is. You, sir, are relying on your preconceived biases to read things into what Nick wrote that are simply not there. You have several friends that are not homosexual I have

Re: What happened to the 1st Amendment???

On 4/12/14 8:21 PM, jimtay...@openmailbox.org wrote: Brendan also claims that the Board first raised the idea of him stepping down on the 26 March. I must have missed this. Can you link me to where you saw that, please? -Boris ___ governance mailing

Re: Updated FAQ on Brendan's resignation

On 4/11/14 6:58 PM, JoeS wrote: I hope she pushed for a correction. From what I understand, we've requested corrections from a number of news outlets on various factually incorrect statements they've made during this whole incident. Some of them made corrections. Others just ignored the re

Re: First Mozilla, Now Dropbox...who's next in the for lack of a better word, Anschluss?

On 4/11/14 5:49 PM, Majken Connor wrote: I have heard under circumstances that can only be considered hearsay that things like death threats were issued towards Brendan I have been told first-hand by Erin that she received death threats as a result of her blog post. I have it second-hand (as

Re: First Mozilla, Now Dropbox...who's next in the for lack of a better word, Anschluss?

On 4/11/14 3:30 PM, »Q« wrote: while recognizing that those tactics are well within the speech rights of the people who employed them. Not all of the tactics employed were within their speech rights. http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/bz/archives/2014/04/speech_and_consequences.html item 2 in the

Re: Back to IE and Microsoft - Mozilla Intolerance

On 4/8/14 9:11 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: On 4/8/14 8:52 PM, »Q« wrote: There is a slightly different version of the document at <https://blog.mozilla.org/press/2014/04/faq-on-ceo-resignation/>. It has the text Jennifer quoted. Aha, thank you! Off to figure out what's going on here

Re: Back to IE and Microsoft - Mozilla Intolerance

On 4/8/14 8:52 PM, »Q« wrote: There is a slightly different version of the document at . It has the text Jennifer quoted. Aha, thank you! Off to figure out what's going on here. ;) -Boris __

Re: Back to IE and Microsoft - Mozilla Intolerance

On 4/7/14 11:19 PM, jenniferle...@gmail.com wrote: It's in the FAQ clear as day and I quote: "A: No. In fact, Board members and senior executives tried to get Brendan to stay at Mozilla in another role or to stay actively involved with Mozilla as a volunteer contributor. Brendan decided that i

Re: Brendan Eich

On 4/7/14 4:11 PM, Dennis Culley wrote: I disagree. The fact that someone works for Mozilla should have no credence regarding their opinion on a personal matter We agree on that. Can you imaging someone saying fat people are stupid, and by the way, my name is so and so and I work for Dunkin

Re: Committed to Diversity????

On 4/7/14 2:05 PM, Catherine Murphy wrote: I didn't get to this group through news coverage. I saw coverage of the story on several conservative blogs -- primarily instapundit.com , but it was written about all over the blogosphere. I believe I also saw something on a CN

Re: Brendan Eich

On 4/7/14 2:40 PM, Dennis Culley wrote: Most organization do not approve of employees using the company name to espouse their own personal views. Most organizations suck in all sorts of ways, sure. I think there is a clear difference between saying "I work for Mozilla, and I think that X" an

Re: Brendan Eich

On 4/7/14 1:49 PM, Dennis Culley wrote: Boris, Do you think Mitchell would post the following statement on her blog? Dennis, I obviously can't speak for Mitchell and what she would or would not post on her blog, and I don't exactly appreciate your attempts to manipulate me into speaking for h

Re: Committed to Diversity????

On 4/7/14 7:31 AM, Catherine Murphy wrote: I appreciate the patience and civility of those who took the time to answer my question. Thank you. Catherine, You're very welcome! I have a question for you, if you're willing to answer it: what news sources led you to this group? We would really

Re: Brendan Eich

On 4/7/14 12:22 PM, Dennis Culley wrote: The tone of this post is unambiguous in the sense that someone did something wrong. Since Brendan was the only one to have been affected Dennis, I'm not sure why you conclude that Brendan was the only one affected. A large number of people were affect

Re: Intolerance to non-Gay marrage and pro Union supporter

On 4/7/14 11:13 AM, Vince Walsh wrote: Mozilla's decision to remove your CEO Vince, Thank you for caring enough to write to us. While the press has commonly and incorrectly reported that Mozilla has removed our CEO, that happens to not be the case. There is an FAQ at https://blog.mozilla.o

Re: As is likely true for countless other long term Mozilla supporters - I've replaced all of my Mozilla products in retaliation for Brenden Eich's forced ousting.

On 4/7/14 11:14 AM, radrianr...@gmail.com wrote: As a non-american, I too, am sickened by the power of a vocal minority (within the world population, if not the american) that has been able to destroy a company that seemed to offer so much. I too have ceased using any Mozilla products. Agai

Re: It's not so much about "diversity" but now about "trust"

On 4/7/14 11:03 AM, Jim Taylor wrote: It fails to state if the board asked Brendan to stay on as CEO or as the janitor? Jim, For what it's worth, I've asked for this part of the FAQ to be clarified. I can't speak to exactly what happened in that discussion, but I suspect it went somewhat l

Re: Back to IE and Microsoft - Mozilla Intolerance

On 4/7/14 1:24 AM, jenniferle...@gmail.com wrote: I think that they tried to get him to stay as a "volunteer contributor" but he wouldn't Jennifer, do you mind linking to the source for that information? I'm not aware of anything to that effect, but I might have missed it. seems to includ

Re: Mozilla has failed itself

On 4/7/14 4:40 AM, cmun...@gmail.com wrote: Where were the personal stories about Brendan? For a lot of us, the issue was http://robert.ocallahan.org/2014/04/responsible-self-censorship.html Why weren't his personal contributions extensively enumerated somewhere (most outlets simply descri

Re: As is likely true for countless other long term Mozilla supporters - I've replaced all of my Mozilla products in retaliation for Brenden Eich's forced ousting.

On 4/6/14 7:29 PM, fredcwe...@gmail.com wrote: The rub isn't whether or not me or millions like me agree or disagree with Brenden Eich's position on traditional marriage, but the utter intolerance demonstrated through these actions in the very name of freedom and tolerance. Fred, I think you

Re: Protesting your stand against Christianity and the Natural Moral Law.

On 4/6/14 2:53 PM, JB1912JB . wrote: I note with incredulity that as a Catholic, I would now be barred from holding a position with your company, simply because I am a follower of Christ. John, Fortunately, you are wrong, though I can understand how you got that impression from the slanted me

Re: Firing

On 4/6/14 12:28 PM, Linus Upson wrote: How can I be assured of honest, forthright, and excellent Mozilla products in light of the recent firing? Linus, For a start, because there was no firing. https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignation/ describes the facts that I'm awar

Re: Your attention on this issue, please

On 4/6/14 11:28 AM, Robert Newhart wrote: Brendan Eich did nothing illegal or immoral and yet I read on the Internet that he was forced out of his job by Mozilla Robert, What you read are either deliberate misrepresentations or, more likely, people repeating these deliberate misrepresentation

Re: Uninstalled - will not support intimidation

On 4/6/14 11:04 AM, Andy Agree wrote: I have uninstalled Firefox after happily using it as my default browser for about 9 years, not because I oppose gay marriage but because of YOUR intolerance of legitimate opinion, cooperation with the labelling of people as haters, destruction of civil dialog

Re: Resignation of CEO Brendan Eich demonstrates that tyranny is a growing force in the USA. RIP Free Speech!

On 4/6/14 8:56 PM, SoCalAngel wrote: I am writing to you to express my outrage at the outright persecution and grossly unfair treatment of CEO Brendan Eich. To a large extent you're preaching to the choir here. Many (I would venture to say most) of us feel that way about the situation. I w

Re: Back to IE and Microsoft - Mozilla Intolerance

On 4/6/14 9:00 PM, Jim Taylor wrote: All ties would include being a module owner. Severing all ties with the Mozilla Corporation, would in fact not include anything about module ownership. Module ownership is very explicitly not tied to employment. -Boris __

Re: FYI: FAQ available

On 4/6/14 1:57 PM, David Ascher wrote: FYI, to those folks kindly answering the barrage of emails, there is now a FAQ addressing some of the most commonly misunderstood aspects of this: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignation/ Are we willing/able to add to this FAQ a m

Re: Recent employment decisions

On 4/5/14 5:46 PM, Doug Warner wrote: Your company has shown they will force an employee to resign Doug, I believe you misunderstand what happened here. What happened is that Brendan chose to resign. He did this because of external pressure (which included nonstop harassment and death threa

governance@lists.mozilla.org

On 9/13/12 3:16 PM, David Bruant wrote: > Le 12/09/2012 16:38, Boris Zbarsky a écrit : >> I think there's a basic assumption here: that there is such a room. >> I'm not sure there is.I think that the major strategic shifts I've >> seen in this project in the l

governance@lists.mozilla.org

On 9/12/12 2:07 PM, David Bruant wrote: I agree with you here. I didn't mean what you're describing. I'm actually puzzled you're coming to such an interpretation just based on what I wrote. Being myself just a volunteer, I wouldn't even follow myself what you describe, I think. I really hoped I

governance@lists.mozilla.org

On 9/11/12 10:32 PM, David Bruant wrote: Would you work on what has been agreed on? Maybe. Would I spend every possible moment working on what has been agreed on, if I disagree with it? Perhaps not. Mozilla does not own its contributors, nor should it. Thought it sounds to me like you th

governance@lists.mozilla.org

On 9/11/12 10:32 PM, David Bruant wrote: > Would you work on what has been agreed on? Maybe. Would I spend every possible moment working on what has been agreed on, if I disagree with it? Perhaps not. Mozilla does not own its contributors, nor should it. Thought it sounds to me like you th