How to land code without landing code in b2g

Lloyd Hilaiel lloyd at
Wed Nov 20 02:20:32 PST 2013

I would be fully supportive of landing with pref in gecko - disabled - sooner rather than later.

There is code change, which means risk.  But that risk is perhaps outweighed by testing disable codepaths early and often, and moving to smaller changes reviewed and landed more frequently.


Jed Parsons <jparsons at> wrote:
>I think we can land the FxAccounts{.jsm,Client.jsm} bits with no
>I feel the other parts are risky because we affect the code path that
>Persona takes on native (through toolkit/identity/MinimalIdentity.jsm
>And the gaia bits would require some kind of build config, since they
>can't access prefs; so that's unfortunately somewhat dissociated, which
>makes the new-features rule more complicated to follow on b2g.
>But as far as gecko goes, hearing Gavin chime in with some
>encouragement makes me wonder whether I'm being too conservative in my
>concerns about the changes to MinimalIdentity.  Perhaps a pref would
>indeed be ok after all ... ?
>[1] I do wish we had a different name for that module
>----- Mensaje original -----
>> De: "Gavin Sharp" <gavin at>
>> Para: "Jed Parsons" <jparsons at>
>> CC: dev-fxacct at
>> Enviados: Lunes, 18 de Noviembre 2013 17:22:35
>> Asunto: Re: How to land code without landing code in b2g
>> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Jed Parsons <jparsons at>
>> > 3. Work normally, but have a pref/build config for FXA on FXOS
>> >
>> > The latter (3) still seems risky to me.
>> Why risky? This is typically how we hold features back. It's actually
>> a rule that new features must be easily disable-able to ride the
>> trains, though we don't always actually follow that rule in practice.
>> Gavin
>Dev-fxacct mailing list
>Dev-fxacct at

lloyd - (on an tiny keyboard)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Dev-fxacct mailing list