Re: Improving blame in Mercurial

2016-01-05 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 9:57 AM, smaug wrote: >> I really liked a lot about the blame implementation that bonsai had, >> unfortunately we don't have a running copy any more AFAIK so it's hard to >> take a >> look at it. >> >> For one thing instead of showing author and changeset (or version in CVS)

Re: "-Moz-Element" -like API by extending WEBGL_dynamic_texture

2016-01-05 Thread Robert O'Callahan
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert wrote: > If it is not feasible to prevent variation in timing or to otherwise > prevent content from determining the content of the texture, perhaps > another approach would be to require all elements to be sanitized before > capturing their

Re: "-Moz-Element" -like API by extending WEBGL_dynamic_texture

2016-01-05 Thread Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert
On 2016-01-04 4:54 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > >> A big problem is sticking HTML/CSS content into WebGL is that WebGL >> effectively enables reading pixel data through custom shaders and >> timing attacks. >> > If you read > https://www.k

Re: "-Moz-Element" -like API by extending WEBGL_dynamic_texture

2016-01-05 Thread Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert
On 2016-01-04 3:54 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote: > On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert > wrote: >> Hello All, >> >> In WebVR, we often present UI as a Head's Up Display (HUD) that floats >> in front of the user. Additionally, we often wish to show 2d graphics, >> video, and CSS anim

Re: e10s tests

2016-01-05 Thread Andrew Halberstadt
I've been a little hesitant to plug this as it's a prototype and the UX is pretty terrible. Also the underlying database it's using is not super resilient. But people might find it useful for this effort and I don't have time to improve it much more anyway, so what the heck. This is basically wha

Re: "-Moz-Element" -like API by extending WEBGL_dynamic_texture

2016-01-05 Thread Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert
On 2016-01-04 4:46 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert < > kgilb...@mozilla.com> wrote: > >> In WebVR, we often present UI as a Head's Up Display (HUD) that floats >> in front of the user. Additionally, we often wish to show 2d graphics, >> video,

e10s tests

2016-01-05 Thread Felipe G
(cross-posted to fx-dev and dev.platform) As we drive towards shipping e10s, we are working on making sure that our tests work with e10s. As you already know, there's a number of tests that are disabled from running on e10s, and we need to enable them. We've created a spreadsheet that lists every

Re: Improving blame in Mercurial

2016-01-05 Thread smaug
On 01/04/2016 07:43 PM, Robert Kaiser wrote: Gregory Szorc schrieb: If you have ideas for making the blame/annotate functionality better, please capture them at https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/BlamePlan or let me know by replying to this message. Your feedback will be used to drive what impro

Re: nsThread now leaks runnables if dispatch fails

2016-01-05 Thread Kyle Huey
On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Randell Jesup wrote: >>Kyle Huey writes: >> >>> (This is a continuation of the discussion in bug 1218297) >>> >>> In bug 1155059 we made nsIEventTarget::Dispatch take an >>> already_AddRefed instead of a raw pointer. This was done to allow the >>> dispatcher to tra

Re: nsThread now leaks runnables if dispatch fails

2016-01-05 Thread Randell Jesup
>> In bug 1218297 we saw a case where dispatch to a thread (the socket >> transport service thread in this case) fails because the thread has >> already shut down. In our brave new world, nsThread simply leaks the >> runnable. It can't release the reference it holds, because that would >> reintro

Re: nsThread now leaks runnables if dispatch fails

2016-01-05 Thread Kyle Huey
The "race condition" here is the question of which thread the runnable destructor runs on. If the executing thread is already shut down the destructor still runs on the "wrong" dispatching thread (or not at all). Since the point of fixing the original race is to guarantee that the destructor runs

Re: nsIProtocolHandler in Electrolysis?

2016-01-05 Thread Cameron Kaiser
On 1/5/16 1:31 AM, Gijs Kruitbosch wrote: On 04/01/2016 20:03, Cameron Kaiser wrote: What's different about nsIProtocolHandler in e10s? OverbiteFF works in 45 aurora without e10s on, but fails to recognize the protocol it defines with e10s enabled. There's no explanation of this in the browser c

Re: Intent to ship: referrerpolicy attribute

2016-01-05 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Masatoshi Kimura wrote: > On 2016/01/04 16:54, Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> There should be, per the specification discussion. E.g., >> >> function isSupported(token) { >> var ele = document.createElement("a") >> ele.referrerPolicy = token >> return el

Re: Intent to ship: referrerpolicy attribute

2016-01-05 Thread Masatoshi Kimura
On 2016/01/04 16:54, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > There should be, per the specification discussion. E.g., > > function isSupported(token) { > var ele = document.createElement("a") > ele.referrerPolicy = token > return ele.referrerPolicy === token > } It didn't work because |ele.ref

Re: nsIProtocolHandler in Electrolysis?

2016-01-05 Thread Gijs Kruitbosch
On 04/01/2016 20:03, Cameron Kaiser wrote: What's different about nsIProtocolHandler in e10s? OverbiteFF works in 45 aurora without e10s on, but fails to recognize the protocol it defines with e10s enabled. There's no explanation of this in the browser console and seemingly no error. Do I have to