53
edits
Electrolysis/Meetings/2016-03-17: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
gw280
No edit summary |
(gw280) |
||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
*Clarity on HB Survey situation: {{Bug|1223895}} | *Clarity on HB Survey situation: {{Bug|1223895}} | ||
*(WIP)Trackback schedule to organize all the details for Beta 47: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/101ra3HjqyufjP79JkGa4e0RyHPLVlJXS43rXtKuoJw4/edit#gid=0. This week's focus needs to be getting the second phase of current experiment ready for next week (Felipe). | *(WIP)Trackback schedule to organize all the details for Beta 47: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/101ra3HjqyufjP79JkGa4e0RyHPLVlJXS43rXtKuoJw4/edit#gid=0. This week's focus needs to be getting the second phase of current experiment ready for next week (Felipe). | ||
== gw280 == | |||
* {{bug|1114647}} - content process rename. feedback is in, Jeff managed to get a BD contact for Panda AV and they're going to whitelist the new executable names. I have some minor review comments to address then we can probably land this on nightly. Will coordinate with Jeff to minimise disruption when it lands. | |||
* {{bug|1176019}} - retain layers for background tabs. have a WIP patch. | |||
* {{bug|1255841}} - hidden select elements get selected. I'm pretty sure I know what the issue is here, and I will have a patch today. | |||
* {{bug|1213432}} - D3D11 WARP perf. Spoke to jrmuizel about this. Basic layers is much faster than WARP for scrolling, and Milan's concern was that we need WARP to have decent video performance. {{bug|1254877}} was filed to investigate WARP video performance, and it looks like Basic is faster than WARP for video as well. I think we can make a very strong case to not support WARP. | |||