Confirmed users, Bureaucrats and Sysops emeriti
3,599
edits
Platform/2009-08-11: Difference between revisions
m
Reverted edits by Beltzner (Talk) to last revision by GPHemsley
| (7 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
| Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
*** {{bug|496923}} (unassigned): Integrate ECMAScript 5 conformance test suite | *** {{bug|496923}} (unassigned): Integrate ECMAScript 5 conformance test suite | ||
*** {{bug|509733}} (unassigned): ES5 chimera arguments object | *** {{bug|509733}} (unassigned): ES5 chimera arguments object | ||
* DWARF Call Frame Info | * DWARF Call Frame Info ({{bug|464750}}) | ||
** needed for breakpad stacks with -fomit-frame-pointer optimization | ** needed for breakpad stacks with -fomit-frame-pointer optimization | ||
** Linux dumper re-architect is landed in Google's SVN repository | ** Linux dumper re-architect is landed in Google's SVN repository | ||
| Line 99: | Line 99: | ||
* Branching for mozilla-1.9.2 {{bug|504143}} | * Branching for mozilla-1.9.2 {{bug|504143}} | ||
** Planning to bring up all normal Firefox builds (linux, linux 64-bit, mac, win32) + l10n, maemo/winmo + l10n. WinCE to come with or shortly after {{bug|485109}}. Anything else? | ** Planning to bring up all normal Firefox builds (linux, linux 64-bit, mac, win32) + l10n, maemo/winmo + l10n. WinCE to come with or shortly after {{bug|485109}}. Anything else? | ||
** | ** Please do not check in to the new mozilla-1.9.2 repositories; we're still cloning mozilla-central and l10n repositories today or tomorrow. | ||
** When are we doing this? Before or after Mobile "go to build"? | ** When are we doing this? Before or after Mobile "go to build"? | ||
*** impact of possible Fennec respins | *** impact of possible Fennec respins | ||
| Line 115: | Line 115: | ||
* Update on Code Coverage (timr) | * Update on Code Coverage (timr) | ||
** Latest results: [http://people.mozilla.com/~mnandigama/codecoverage_html/ c/c++] and [http://people.mozilla.com/~mnandigama/jscoverage-report/jscoverage.html JS] | ** Latest results: [http://people.mozilla.com/~mnandigama/codecoverage_html/ c/c++] and [http://people.mozilla.com/~mnandigama/jscoverage-report/jscoverage.html JS] | ||
** We had a good discussions with the Content and JS teams last week. Some issues we are looking into are: | ** We had a good discussions with the Content and JS teams last week. Some issues we are looking into are: Specific files with surprisingly low coverage. How coverage for in-lined code is handled. Annotating the coverage results pages with info like: a file was recently re-designed and therefore previous bug data may no longer be valid. Setting up coverage on additional platforms. | ||
** Also see the new [http://mkngama.blogspot.com/2009/08/code-coverage-results-study-faqs.html FAQ] and [ | ** Also see the new [http://mkngama.blogspot.com/2009/08/code-coverage-results-study-faqs.html FAQ] and [[CodeCoverage/Firefly|new Code Cov one stop shopping wiki]] | ||
** Other next steps: Identify with the Dev teams which files should be targeted for additional testing. Work with other teams like the Firefox team to understand how this info could be used. Feel free to contact Murali or myself if you want to dig into the data with us. | ** Other next steps: Identify with the Dev teams which files should be targeted for additional testing. Work with other teams like the Firefox team to understand how this info could be used. Feel free to contact Murali or myself if you want to dig into the data with us. | ||
* Content intern project progress | * Content intern project progress | ||
* unittests on debug builds coming ({{bug|372581}}) | |||
** dbaron is planning to treat stuff that breaks unittests on debug builds as "orange", and thus deserve to have NS_ABORT_IF_FALSE summarily changed to NS_ASSERTION if it fires during our tests (and likewise NS_ASSERTIONs that fire during xpcshell tests changing to NS_WARNING) | |||
** we're having issues with extremely slow tests (mochitest-browser-chrome), and huge log files (~ 3.8 GB, mostly assertions) | |||