[desktop] Bugs logged by Desktop Release QA in the last 8 days

Hello, Here's the list of new issues found and filed by the Desktop Release QA team last two weeks. Additional details on the team's priorities last week, as well as the plans for the current week are available at: https://tinyurl.com/ya83ljg6 Bugs logged by Desktop Release QA in the last 8 days

PSA: pay attention when setting multiple reviewers in Phabricator

TL;DR When asking for review to multiple reviewers, and all of them must accept your revision, you must mark them as blocking reviews, either in the Phabricator ui or appending "!" at the end of the reviewer name. Otherwise it's first-come-first-serve. Full details: Standard8 asked for review to b

Re: PSA: pay attention when setting multiple reviewers in Phabricator

Also sprach Marco Bonardo: > When asking for review to multiple reviewers, and all of them must accept > your revision, you must mark them as blocking reviews, either in the > Phabricator ui or appending "!" at the end of the reviewer name. Otherwise > it's first-come-first-serve. Note that is an

Re: PSA: pay attention when setting multiple reviewers in Phabricator

On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 5:01 PM Andreas Tolfsen wrote: > > > When asking for review to multiple reviewers, and all of them must accept > > your revision, you must mark them as blocking reviews, either in the > > Phabricator ui or appending "!" at the end of the reviewer name. > Otherwise > > it's

Re: Rust crate approval

I think the key distinction here is that, unlike other rust-based projects (i.e. Servo), Firefox vendors all cargo dependencies into the tree, so it's more obvious to reviewers when a patch indirectly pulls in a new large dependency. In Servo the reviewer would have to look carefully at the Cargo.l

Re: Rust crate approval

Cool! I was just worried, especially since hyper and tokio/mio are *already* vendored in-tree (though openssl is not yet). It appears they're used for network access in some test tools and an audio ipc server prototype. So we're not talking about a bunch of code "appearing" in third-party, but rath

Re: PSA: pay attention when setting multiple reviewers in Phabricator

On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Andreas Tolfsen wrote: > Also sprach Marco Bonardo: > > > When asking for review to multiple reviewers, and all of them must accept > > your revision, you must mark them as blocking reviews, either in the > > Phabricator ui or appending "!" at the end of the review

Re: Intent to disable 'backlog' tracking flag in Bugzilla

As I've not heard objections to this, I'm disabling the flag. Thanks, -- Emma On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 12:19 AM Emma Humphries wrote: > The 'backlog' (originally known as 'blocking-loop') tracking flag, is > available for bugs in Core::Audio/Video* and Core::WebRTC*. > > The flag is no longer u

Re: Getting files from builders to test machines

On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Geoff Lankow wrote: > On comm-central we have a number of extensions that get built alongside > everything else, but are not shipped. (That is, building produces a .xpi > file in objdir/dist/xpi-stage.) I'd like to be able to have them uploaded > as build artefacts

Re: PSA: pay attention when setting multiple reviewers in Phabricator

Jean-Yves Avenard wrote on 3/7/18 6:23 am: On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Andreas Tolfsen > wrote: Also sprach Marco Bonardo: > When asking for review to multiple reviewers, and all of them must accept > your revision, you must mark them as blocking reviews, eit