On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 11:40 AM, L. David Baron <[email protected]> wrote:
> What sort of plan for turning things off would you expect for > somewhat architectural performance improvements like these: > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=636029 > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=636039 > These are things for which we have pretty solid test coverage, but > there is a risk of some small (but easily fixable) regressions, and > I don't see a realistic way to plan for turning them off other than > planning to back them out. > Probably backing them out is the plan. Some changes can be split up into "huge but relatively safe" patches and "small but less safe" patches, which is worth doing if it gives us the ability to only back out the "small but less safe" patches. I don't know if that's an option for you. I think the goal here should be to minimize the expected cost of disabling stuff--- the cost of disabling multiplied by the probability of having to disable. Rob -- "Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." [Acts 17:11] _______________________________________________ dev-tech-layout mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-layout
