"Bobby fixed a crash" - A crash relating to what ? This changelog is awful, who approved this?
This isn't a changelog, this is a newsletter for folks wanting to keep up with development.
WebRender is in beta
61–70 of 78 posts
Re: WebRender is in beta
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Me too. A bit of Googling told me that if you set the variable MOZ_WEBRENDER=1 it enables it. That worked.
That doesn't seem to work
I haven't tried these instructions, but the Android WebRender bug:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1453367#c13
says to download the "geckoview_example" app's APK:
https://queue.taskcluster.net/v1/task/AY-d7ns9QOGZuFj3syrsDQ...
and then remotely launch the geckoview_example app from a connected desktop machine:
adb shell am start -n org.mozilla.geckoview_example/.GeckoViewActivity --es env0 MOZ_WEBRENDER=1Re: WebRender is in beta
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't yet work on fennec (regular Firefox for Android, which is non-e10s). Instead we're working on it for geckoview.
I keep wondering about GeckoView vs Fennec. Surely Fennec already contains something much like GeckoView, so what will the difference be and when will (Nightly) Fennec switch?
GeckoView and Fennec share the same Gecko code, but GeckoView provides an embedding API for other apps and has some runtime differences like enabling e10s (sandboxed content process separate from the app UI). GeckoView-based features (like e10s and WebRender) will eventually be folded back into Fennec.
Re: WebRender is in beta
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is that "GPU support", on Linux anyway. Hardware accelerated video decoding is barely worth it on Linux. Crashes galore. Does Chromium even enable it by default? The problem is not writing the "GPU support", but working around the mountain of Xorg bugs that it triggers. As an example just this week, I recently ripped out OS compositing support from WebRender on X because it was simply impossible to deploy withou…
Glad to hear work this is something that's being worked on because Firefox is still losing market share. And that's not good news for all of us. You may put GPU support in quotation marks, but Chromium is way snappier and faster than Firefox nightlies on my Linux box, and I suspect taking advantage of the GPU is a part of the equation. I also suspect the whole pipeline is more optimized on Chrome. Firefox has ~3x the…
One must wonder, if Firefox might do better at being a browser, if they stopped chasing money by questionable integrations with tangential services and focused on their core competencies. It seems like hardly a week can go by without a new announcement that Mozilla has their fingers in some new also-ran company in a new market.
Re: WebRender is in beta
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've never used smooth scrolling in any browser (Firefox, Chrome, IE) that didn't feel laggy. It's the first thing I turn off anymore.
Safari and Edge with touch scrolling are buttery smooth! If you’re talking about a smooth scrolling option imposed on a clicky mouse wheel, I’m not sure if it’s even possible it is to make that feel snappy.
Yep, Edge gets it right when you have a precision trackpad. Chrome and Firefox unfortunately do not track the motion on the trackpad nearly as well
Re: WebRender is in beta
#66I've just made very basic integration with node. It's rather PoC, but it works. It can currently show a window and render moving rect from vue.js template. There's still a lot of work to be done, webrender does too little to be just drop in replacement for electron but it might be worth watching if you're interested in anything like that (lightweight cross-platform opengl-rendered gui apps developed in react/vue/angu…
the demo runs very choppy and the window is not closable here
Re: WebRender is in beta
#67I've just made very basic integration with node. It's rather PoC, but it works. It can currently show a window and render moving rect from vue.js template. There's still a lot of work to be done, webrender does too little to be just drop in replacement for electron but it might be worth watching if you're interested in anything like that (lightweight cross-platform opengl-rendered gui apps developed in react/vue/angu…
the demo runs very choppy and the window is not closable here
it's not animated at all actually, there's 100ms setInterval, which mutates the state and the vue then in turn sends a new frame
https://github.com/cztomsik/node-webrender/blob/master/examp...
Re: WebRender is in beta
#68I've just made very basic integration with node. It's rather PoC, but it works. It can currently show a window and render moving rect from vue.js template. There's still a lot of work to be done, webrender does too little to be just drop in replacement for electron but it might be worth watching if you're interested in anything like that (lightweight cross-platform opengl-rendered gui apps developed in react/vue/angu…
This is a nice experiment ! There are a few people starting to hack around with WebRender. There are already Limn, Azul, Stylish, etc...it would be nice if we joined forces in developing one good UI framework powered by WebRender.
Thanks for those links, azul is very interesting!
This is my first rust project, so I'm not sure if I would be any help
I also think it's better to have as much GUI part as possible in typescript, try-and-refine cycle is shorter and imagine how it could be with live/hot-reload
What I'm trying to do is something like electron but lighter, faster and memory-savvy. I think it could use azul, so thanks a lot :-)
Re: WebRender is in beta
#69Wondering if Pathfinder made it to this release? Perhaps pcwalton could chime in?
It's in the codebase as an optional code path for fonts but not enabled. The graphics team prefers to do a staged rollout where we roll out WebRender first before enabling Pathfinder. I agree with the caution.
Happy to hear it's in the codebase. It's an exciting project!
Re: WebRender is in beta
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chromium has long-standing unresolved issues about adding GPU acceleration for video decoding too? https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=463440 https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/53...
Honestly, I think it isn't worth it, as long as we're on X. X11 is not a reasonable protocol, and Xorg is not a reasonable implementation anymore. It's had a good run, but it's time to move on.
Will the situation improve with Wayland? It seems like Firefox is generally moving in the direction of natively supporting Wayland but it doesn't seem like a high priority for now.