Partially self-built Firefox OS (was: Re: Supported locales in Firefox OS and OEMs)

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Gervase Markham <gerv@mozilla.org> wrote:
> I _hope_ (as in, it fits with our principles, I think it was the case,
> but I am not closely involved) that one thing we do require is for the
> phones to be unlockable. So people can, at least theoretically, install
> other builds of Firefox OS, including versions with different locales,
> after they have purchased the phone. Of course, this would require
> CyanogenMod-like engineering because the phones will have proprietary
> drivers in them.

Having to install a new native code image to get localized strings
seems like an overkill.

However, I'm curious about other cases:
 * Will users be able to retain the vendor-supplied Gonk layer (in
order to retain proprietary drivers while exercising software freedom
higher up in the stack) and install a self-built Gecko layer on top of
it?
 * Will users who have a self-built Gonk layer be able to subscribe to
a Mozilla-provided Gecko layer update channel (i.e. run
Mozilla-provided higher layers on top of an unofficial device
adaptation)?

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
0
Henri
1/23/2013 12:43:22 PM
mozilla.governance 733 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

16 Replies
1311 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 38

On 23/01/13 12:43, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Having to install a new native code image to get localized strings
> seems like an overkill.

I agree it's not ideal.

> However, I'm curious about other cases:
>  * Will users be able to retain the vendor-supplied Gonk layer (in
> order to retain proprietary drivers while exercising software freedom
> higher up in the stack) and install a self-built Gecko layer on top of
> it?

Define "be able to" ;-) My observation in the case of Android leads me
to believe that phone vendors are not interested in pursuing people and
projects who do this sort of hackery on phones they have bought.

>  * Will users who have a self-built Gonk layer be able to subscribe to
> a Mozilla-provided Gecko layer update channel (i.e. run
> Mozilla-provided higher layers on top of an unofficial device
> adaptation)?

If the update servers are accessible to the web, then Mozilla would have
to take specific steps to prevent this, wouldn't they? I can't see us
doing that...

Gerv

0
Gervase
1/23/2013 2:21:28 PM
On 01/23/13 09:21 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 23/01/13 12:43, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>>  * Will users who have a self-built Gonk layer be able to subscribe to
>> a Mozilla-provided Gecko layer update channel (i.e. run
>> Mozilla-provided higher layers on top of an unofficial device
>> adaptation)?
> 
> If the update servers are accessible to the web, then Mozilla would have
> to take specific steps to prevent this, wouldn't they? I can't see us
> doing that...

It's worth noting that Mozilla is not going to be running the update
servers for FxOS. I'm 99% sure it's the telcos that will be, but it's
possible that it may be the manufacturer. I don't think it's safe to
assume anything about the availability of gecko/gaia updates for users
who built their own gonk. However, I also don't think we should be too
concerned about it. As with Desktop or Android Firefox, it's not a great
use of our time to commit to the same level of support for these sorts
of things.
0
Ben
1/23/2013 2:36:56 PM
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Ben Hearsum <bhearsum@mozilla.com> wrote:
> It's worth noting that Mozilla is not going to be running the update
> servers for FxOS. I'm 99% sure it's the telcos that will be, but it's
> possible that it may be the manufacturer.

So there will effectively be no (or a single) updates to gecko/gaia,
for most devices?

Cheers,

Dirkjan
0
Dirkjan
1/23/2013 2:49:30 PM
On 01/23/13 09:49 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Ben Hearsum <bhearsum@mozilla.com> wrote:
>> It's worth noting that Mozilla is not going to be running the update
>> servers for FxOS. I'm 99% sure it's the telcos that will be, but it's
>> possible that it may be the manufacturer.
> 
> So there will effectively be no (or a single) updates to gecko/gaia,
> for most devices?

Let me be clear: I am not in a position of authority here, I'm merely
speaking from what I've heard as a member of the Release Engineering
team. To the best of knowledge, we have no plans for a Mozilla-run
update server for FxOS. I would suggest talking to the B2G team directly
about plans for gecko/gaia updates for devices not purchased through a
telco.

With that said though, what makes you think that "most devices" won't
get updates? AFAIK 99% or more of our devices will be sold through a
telco... (again, I'm not authoritative on this, it's merely my own
understanding).
0
Ben
1/23/2013 2:53:14 PM
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Ben Hearsum <bhearsum@mozilla.com> wrote:
> With that said though, what makes you think that "most devices" won't
> get updates? AFAIK 99% or more of our devices will be sold through a
> telco... (again, I'm not authoritative on this, it's merely my own
> understanding).

Experience with software updates from telcos/manufacturers in the
Android world makes me fairly pessimistic on their incentives to
prepare software updates for devices they've already sold.

Cheers,

Dirkjan
0
Dirkjan
1/23/2013 2:57:34 PM
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Ben Hearsum <bhearsum@mozilla.com> wrote:
> It's worth noting that Mozilla is not going to be running the update
> servers for FxOS.

Interesting. I thought the point of the Gonk/Gecko separation was that
Gonk would serve as a porting target for Gecko and, therefore, enable
shipping =E2=80=9CGecko for Gonk=E2=80=9D binaries instead of =E2=80=9CGeck=
o for device Foo=E2=80=9D,
=E2=80=9CGecko for device Bar=E2=80=9D.

> I'm 99% sure it's the telcos that will be, but it's
> possible that it may be the manufacturer.

Can a user expect that a Firefox-branded device gets a Gecko update
every x weeks for the duration of at least y years for some known x
and y?

> I don't think it's safe to
> assume anything about the availability of gecko/gaia updates for users
> who built their own gonk. However, I also don't think we should be too
> concerned about it. As with Desktop or Android Firefox, it's not a great
> use of our time to commit to the same level of support for these sorts
> of things.

In the case of desktop and Android, the user can get Mozilla-built
Firefox even if the user is running self-compiled kernel/drivers.

--=20
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
0
Henri
1/23/2013 3:15:19 PM
On 01/23/13 10:15 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Ben Hearsum <bhearsum@mozilla.com> wrote:
>> It's worth noting that Mozilla is not going to be running the update
>> servers for FxOS.
> 
> Interesting. I thought the point of the Gonk/Gecko separation was that
> Gonk would serve as a porting target for Gecko and, therefore, enable
> shipping “Gecko for Gonk” binaries instead of “Gecko for device Foo”,
> “Gecko for device Bar”.

Again, I'm not authoritative on this. Don't take my word for gospel.

>> I'm 99% sure it's the telcos that will be, but it's
>> possible that it may be the manufacturer.
> 
> Can a user expect that a Firefox-branded device gets a Gecko update
> every x weeks for the duration of at least y years for some known x
> and y?

I'm going to refrain from saying anything else because I realized that
unless I can say something with authority (which I can't), I can only
cause confusion. I would recommend taking this conversation to #b2g or
another place with the people who make these decisions.

Sorry I can't be more help here.
- Ben
0
Ben
1/23/2013 3:30:46 PM
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Ben Hearsum <bhearsum@mozilla.com> wrote:
> I'm going to refrain from saying anything else because I realized that
> unless I can say something with authority (which I can't), I can only
> cause confusion. I would recommend taking this conversation to #b2g or
> another place with the people who make these decisions.

Are none of the people involved with Firefox OS on this list?

I've now had several long-time Mozilla contributors express
disappointment to me on IRC. The lack of Mozilla-controlled updates
certainly seems somewhat hostile to the Manifesto/Mission; it seems
likely that security updates will reach users later than what could be
done if Mozilla controlled the updates, to name just one example.

I'm happy to go and ask about this on a B2G-related list, but it seems
like a governance issue to me.

Cheers,

Dirkjan
0
Dirkjan
1/23/2013 5:13:42 PM
On 01/23/13 12:13 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Ben Hearsum <bhearsum@mozilla.com> wrote:
>> I'm going to refrain from saying anything else because I realized that
>> unless I can say something with authority (which I can't), I can only
>> cause confusion. I would recommend taking this conversation to #b2g or
>> another place with the people who make these decisions.
> 
> Are none of the people involved with Firefox OS on this list?

I don't know.

> I've now had several long-time Mozilla contributors express
> disappointment to me on IRC. The lack of Mozilla-controlled updates
> certainly seems somewhat hostile to the Manifesto/Mission; it seems
> likely that security updates will reach users later than what could be
> done if Mozilla controlled the updates, to name just one example.
>
> I'm happy to go and ask about this on a B2G-related list, but it seems
> like a governance issue to me.

I think that would be a good place to start, if only to say "hey, come
talk about this over here".

0
Ben
1/23/2013 5:27:38 PM
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
------enig2EJNCWKXDICPJFFPKCIIE
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

El 23/01/13 18:13, Dirkjan Ochtman escribi=F3:
> I'm happy to go and ask about this on a B2G-related list, but it seems
> like a governance issue to me.
And please share with us the answers, I'm also concerned about OMEs
controlling updates :S

Regards.

--=20
Rub=E9n Mart=EDn [Nukeador]
Mozilla Reps Mentor
http://www.mozilla-hispano.org
http://twitter.com/mozilla_hispano
http://facebook.com/mozillahispano



------enig2EJNCWKXDICPJFFPKCIIE
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlEANXQACgkQF+Cr28b0I+YUvACgxVzruf3M/7z2xm7RErzfcVn5
tIMAoL70c+lTQQ7hfjhc6WfBje6zCCLQ
=WDQN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

------enig2EJNCWKXDICPJFFPKCIIE--
0
ISO
1/23/2013 7:09:40 PM
On Wednesday, January 23, 2013 6:36:56 AM UTC-8, Ben Hearsum wrote:
> On 01/23/13 09:21 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
>=20
> > On 23/01/13 12:43, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>=20
> >>  * Will users who have a self-built Gonk layer be able to subscribe to
>=20
> >> a Mozilla-provided Gecko layer update channel (i.e. run
>=20
> >> Mozilla-provided higher layers on top of an unofficial device
>=20
> >> adaptation)?
>=20
> >=20
>=20
> > If the update servers are accessible to the web, then Mozilla would hav=
e
>=20
> > to take specific steps to prevent this, wouldn't they? I can't see us
>=20
> > doing that...
>=20
>=20
>=20
> It's worth noting that Mozilla is not going to be running the update
>=20
> servers for FxOS. I'm 99% sure it's the telcos that will be, but it's
>=20
> possible that it may be the manufacturer. I don't think it's safe to
>=20
> assume anything about the availability of gecko/gaia updates for users
>=20
> who built their own gonk. However, I also don't think we should be too
>=20
> concerned about it. As with Desktop or Android Firefox, it's not a great
>=20
> use of our time to commit to the same level of support for these sorts
>=20
> of things.

We have not made any announcements around the availability of updates (Mozi=
lla-provided or otherwise) at this time, and no overarching decisions have =
been made for the life of Firefox OS. What I would like to note is that pho=
ne OS updates are not synonymous with browser updates on other platforms - =
they have their own very specific requirements and we can expect difference=
s in their implementation. For instance, each update needs to be qualified =
by multiple partners. Think legal certification requirements as well as ful=
l stack quality checks externally. As for security updates specifically, th=
e security and release teams are working closely with partners to ensure th=
at they understand the necessity for frequent security updates on a regular=
 cadence. We'll keep you all updated as things solidify.
0
akeybl
1/23/2013 7:19:54 PM
On Wednesday, January 23, 2013 6:36:56 AM UTC-8, Ben Hearsum wrote:
> On 01/23/13 09:21 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
>=20
> > On 23/01/13 12:43, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>=20
> >>  * Will users who have a self-built Gonk layer be able to subscribe to
>=20
> >> a Mozilla-provided Gecko layer update channel (i.e. run
>=20
> >> Mozilla-provided higher layers on top of an unofficial device
>=20
> >> adaptation)?
>=20
> >=20
>=20
> > If the update servers are accessible to the web, then Mozilla would hav=
e
>=20
> > to take specific steps to prevent this, wouldn't they? I can't see us
>=20
> > doing that...
>=20
>=20
>=20
> It's worth noting that Mozilla is not going to be running the update
>=20
> servers for FxOS. I'm 99% sure it's the telcos that will be, but it's
>=20
> possible that it may be the manufacturer. I don't think it's safe to
>=20
> assume anything about the availability of gecko/gaia updates for users
>=20
> who built their own gonk. However, I also don't think we should be too
>=20
> concerned about it. As with Desktop or Android Firefox, it's not a great
>=20
> use of our time to commit to the same level of support for these sorts
>=20
> of things.

We have not made any announcements around the availability of updates (Mozi=
lla-provided or otherwise) at this time, and no overarching decisions have =
been made for the life of Firefox OS. What I would like to note is that pho=
ne OS updates are not synonymous with browser updates on other platforms - =
they have their own very specific requirements and we can expect difference=
s in their implementation. For instance, each update needs to be qualified =
by multiple partners. Think legal certification requirements as well as ful=
l stack quality checks externally. As for security updates specifically, th=
e security and release teams are working closely with partners to ensure th=
at they understand the necessity for frequent security updates on a regular=
 cadence. We'll keep you all updated as things solidify.
0
akeybl
1/23/2013 7:19:54 PM
On Wednesday 2013-01-23 11:19 -0800, akeybl@mozilla.com wrote:
> We have not made any announcements around the availability of
> updates (Mozilla-provided or otherwise) at this time, and no
> overarching decisions have been made for the life of Firefox OS.
> What I would like to note is that phone OS updates are not
> synonymous with browser updates on other platforms - they have
> their own very specific requirements and we can expect differences
> in their implementation. For instance, each update needs to be
> qualified by multiple partners. Think legal certification
> requirements as well as full stack quality checks externally. As
> for security updates specifically, the security and release teams
> are working closely with partners to ensure that they understand
> the necessity for frequent security updates on a regular cadence.
> We'll keep you all updated as things solidify.

I think it's also important to work with partners to ensure they
understand why more than security updates are needed on a regular
cadence, in particular, why updates to newer Gecko release trains
are needed on a regular basis.

When people develop applications for the Web, they're generally
testing that their application works on a certain set of browsers,
basically the set of browsers that have enough market share for them
to care about.  When developers can depend on new features is a
function of when *all* of these browsers support the new feature (or
at least enough that they're willing to sacrifice the market share
for the rest).  When developers can depend on performance
improvements that improve the performance characteristics of the Web
as a platform again depends on when *all* of these browsers support
the new feature.  And how consistent these browsers are with each
other has a big effect on how easy or difficult the development
experience is.

On the mobile Web today, there's a big problem with out of date
browser engines, but today it's out-of-date WebKit.  When Facebook
said that HTML5 wasn't ready, my *understanding* (which may be
wrong) is that they weren't talking about the technology in current
browsers being ready; they were talking about old versions of WebKit
that are extremely common on phones and other mobile devices.

Populating the world with significant numbers of devices running
outdated browsers cripples our ability to move the Web forward and
the ability of the Web to compete with other platforms; shipping new
versions of Gecko users of Firefox OS phones is critical to our
ability to move the Web forward, which I believe is a key part of
our mission.

-David

-- 
𝄞   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   𝄂
𝄢   Mozilla                           http://www.mozilla.org/   𝄂
0
L
1/24/2013 7:41:47 PM
Dirkjan Ochtman schrieb:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Ben Hearsum <bhearsum@mozilla.com> wrote:
>> With that said though, what makes you think that "most devices" won't
>> get updates? AFAIK 99% or more of our devices will be sold through a
>> telco... (again, I'm not authoritative on this, it's merely my own
>> understanding).
>
> Experience with software updates from telcos/manufacturers in the
> Android world makes me fairly pessimistic on their incentives to
> prepare software updates for devices they've already sold.

Note that as long as they are using our "Firefox" brand to lable it as 
"FirefoxOS", we have some leverage in what the requirements are to be 
able to use that branding. Security updates have always been a 
requirement to use the Firefox brand on distributed packages of e.g. 
Linux distributions, I'd think that such a requirement is there for 
FirefoxOS as well. If telcos et.c decide to ship without our brands, 
calling it "B2G" or "OpenWebPhone" or whatever they please, they escape 
that of course, as well as any other requirements we make to use our 
brands. They are shipping it, so in the end, it's their decision.

Robert Kaiser
0
Robert
1/25/2013 7:21:15 PM
Dirkjan Ochtman schrieb:
> The lack of Mozilla-controlled updates
> certainly seems somewhat hostile to the Manifesto/Mission

Note that's what happens with Firefox for openSUSE, Fedora, Ubuntu etc. 
as well when you install from their repositories (in those three cases, 
it's even in the default install). Mozilla does not ship any updates to 
those builds, the distributors do - and our trademark rules actually 
make it necessary for them to do so to be able to have it branded 
"Firefox", AFAIK.
I would expect that similar clauses are in effect when partners ship 
FirefoxOS to users under that brand.

Robert Kaiser
0
Robert
1/25/2013 7:24:47 PM
Le 24/01/2013 20:41, L. David Baron a écrit :
> On Wednesday 2013-01-23 11:19 -0800, akeybl@mozilla.com wrote:
>> We have not made any announcements around the availability of
>> updates (Mozilla-provided or otherwise) at this time, and no
>> overarching decisions have been made for the life of Firefox OS.
>> What I would like to note is that phone OS updates are not
>> synonymous with browser updates on other platforms - they have
>> their own very specific requirements and we can expect differences
>> in their implementation. For instance, each update needs to be
>> qualified by multiple partners. Think legal certification
>> requirements as well as full stack quality checks externally. As
>> for security updates specifically, the security and release teams
>> are working closely with partners to ensure that they understand
>> the necessity for frequent security updates on a regular cadence.
>> We'll keep you all updated as things solidify.
> I think it's also important to work with partners to ensure they
> understand why more than security updates are needed on a regular
> cadence, in particular, why updates to newer Gecko release trains
> are needed on a regular basis.
>
> When people develop applications for the Web, they're generally
> testing that their application works on a certain set of browsers,
> basically the set of browsers that have enough market share for them
> to care about.  When developers can depend on new features is a
> function of when *all* of these browsers support the new feature (or
> at least enough that they're willing to sacrifice the market share
> for the rest).  When developers can depend on performance
> improvements that improve the performance characteristics of the Web
> as a platform again depends on when *all* of these browsers support
> the new feature.  And how consistent these browsers are with each
> other has a big effect on how easy or difficult the development
> experience is.
>
> On the mobile Web today, there's a big problem with out of date
> browser engines, but today it's out-of-date WebKit.  When Facebook
> said that HTML5 wasn't ready, my *understanding* (which may be
> wrong) is that they weren't talking about the technology in current
> browsers being ready; they were talking about old versions of WebKit
> that are extremely common on phones and other mobile devices.
>
> Populating the world with significant numbers of devices running
> outdated browsers cripples our ability to move the Web forward and
> the ability of the Web to compete with other platforms; shipping new
> versions of Gecko users of Firefox OS phones is critical to our
> ability to move the Web forward, which I believe is a key part of
> our mission.
I could not agree more on the intention but can't help adding a pinch of 
salt.

About partners.
if they don't just push Mozilla updates, it's because they want to 
review updates carefully, certify them. So, the more update, the more 
work it is for them. I don't have a clue of how much work is to 
review/certify updates, but since partners have limited resources, it 
may refrain them from pushing some updates. Gecko updates would probably 
be the ones left aside, due to their non-critical aspect. Mozilla is 
probably the only entity that can help reduce the burden off partners' 
shoulders because it knows Gecko and can help partners 
understand/review/certify updates quickly.

Apps may break after a Gecko update.
Congratulations to Gecko/SpiderMonkey for being the only engines running 
OpenWebApps for now. This however comes with a set of dangers: people 
can rely on Mozilla-specific extensions/bugs. I'm just back from 
FirefoxOS app days in Bucharest and some people port apps from other 
languages. If they find a misknown feature/bug of SpiderMonkey/Gecko to 
make their app either work without further effort or to improve 
performance, they will. Does anyone know if at least none of Gaia apps 
use Mozilla-specific features?
Gecko updates potentially breaking apps (which users may have paid for!) 
may be a deal-breaker to push Gecko updates to phones.
I'm not sure what can be done to address this issue. I mean, I'm not 
sure what can be done additionally to what people already do fixing 
standard-compliance related bugs and removing unnecessary 
Mozilla-specific features.

David
0
David
1/28/2013 9:00:40 AM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Supported locales in Firefox OS and OEMs
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) ------enig2UDMJCKEHFFANDRNHSHRA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, I would like to follow up a thread on web.l10n about locales in Firefox OS <https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=3D#%21topic/mozilla.dev.l10n= /Xk9pHBz5uTU> on behalf of everyone who showed their concerns there. It seems we are only shipping locales that OEMs want to include and excluding the rest. A lot of l10n teams are not happy to work and don't see their locales shipped. ...

Re: Firefox, Firefox OS as a gamer platform
Hi Kami, Wow!! That really does look like it's going to be an awesome event. I'm a hobbyist game developer (mainly on HTML5 platform) and like Brian King, I also wish I could attend the event :'(, it seems like I could learn a lot. Anyway, I think you could showcase some games that are interesting to play and have been done using web technologies (and if possible, have also been submitted to the Firefox OS market). You could talk about the design and implementation challenges, as well as monetization options available and the ones opted for. Wish you all the best in ...

Flash your Firefox OS tablet with firefox os 2.1
--047d7bb70c0013f17904fe2b2b89 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Friends I have recently flashed my Tablet with OS 2.1 and I have seen that many of my friends are facing problem in flashing there devices. So I have written a blog post to flash your devices please have a look on it and let me know if you are facing any issue. Here is the link to blog post : http://openmoz.wordpress.com/2014/07/13/flash-firefox-os-2-1-into-your-tablet/ *Major problem*: I have tried using windows and its has successfully booted into fastboot mode, but what to do next as .bat files are not...

Flash your Firefox OS tablet with firefox os 2.1
--001a11c3bb147969f604fe2a10f0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Friends I have recently flashed my Tablet with OS 2.1 and I have seen that many of my friends are facing problem in flashing there devices. So I have written a blog post to flash your devices please have a look on it and let me know if you are facing any issue. Here is the link to blog post : http://openmoz.wordpress.com/2014/07/13/flash-firefox-os-2-1-into-your-tablet/ *Major problem*: I have tried using windows and its has successfully booted into fastboot mode, but what to do next as .bat files are not...

issue about Firefox OS API and Firefox OS email client
Hi all, I try to create simple application for Firefox OS: this application will check my email-server for new emails and will vibrate if some new emails were found in inbox. I search the simplest way to make this app with Firefox OS API, but, looks like it is not easy and it will be hard to make the custom application, which should connect to 'black-box' server on the specific port and send custom messages (do we have standard API for this, which we can use now?) Also, I review code of standard Firefox OS email client and as I can see in https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/ga...

Flash your Firefox OS tablet with firefox os 2.1
Hi Friends I have recently flashed my Tablet with OS 2.1 and I have seen that many of my friends are facing problem in flashing there devices. So I have written a blog post to flash your devices please have a look on it and let me know if you are facing any issue. Here is the link to blog post : http://openmoz.wordpress.com/2014/07/13/flash-firefox-os-2-1-into-your-tablet/ *Major problem*: I have tried using windows and its has successfully booted into fastboot mode, but what to do next as .bat files are not working? *Answer* : I will suggest you to to further step using linux, ...

Localizing Firefox OS.
Hi, I'm trying to localize Firefox OS, but I'm wondering If I am missing any step. I have made a question about it at Stackoverfow: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/20824587/localizing-firefox-os-b2g Regards. On 12/29/13 12:33 PM, A. Crespo wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to localize Firefox OS, but I'm wondering If I am missing any > step. I have made a question about it at Stackoverfow: > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/20824587/localizing-firefox-os-b2g > > Regards. > I've followed up on stackoverflow. Willy, if there's s...

Firefox OS
Hi, I have built the firefox build (Nightly) in gecko. After building successfully, the Nightly can be invoked by ./mach run However, I dont understand where is the entry for this nightly. I mean, kinda main function in C. Could anyone instruct me about this? Thanks Does anyone has experience on this? thanks On 03/24/2014 08:19 PM, Paul wrote: > Does anyone has experience on this? thanks > Please follow up on mozilla.dev.platform; this isn't a b2g-specific question (and doesn't even seem to focus on b2g at all). Gecko has a main function, but XRE...

Removendo todos os contatos no Firefox OS
Preciso remover todos os contatos do meu aparelho com Firefox OS (Alcatel). Qual a maneira mais fácil, rápida e segura de fazer isso? Longa história -------------- Comprei um aparelho para substituir meu outro aparelho que parou de funcionar. Passei os contatos para o cartão de memória e mandei carregá-los. Até aqui não tive problemas. Como eventualmente costumo alterar o contato em outro lugar, gostaria de poder atualizar os contatos também pelo cartão de memória (não sei se é possível manter os contatos no c...

Sync support in Firefox OS?
Are there any plans to bring Sync support to Firefox OS in 2015? It's one of the key features for FxA, isn't it? ...

How do we support widget in Firefox OS
Hi Gaia developers, Recently we have some user scenarios that require widget feature to be = supported in Firefox OS. Widgets are applications with limited = functionality on homescreen. On Android devices, user can long tap homescreen and add widget on it. = For example, user might want to add customized clock widget and display = it (with animation) on homescreen. Or user might want to install an = email widget which displayed latest mail title on top of it.=20 We don't have any assumptions or thoughts on how much functionality = difference between widgets and apps. However,...

Firefox OS localization in Hindi
Dear All, We are very happy to share the outcome of todays virtual event, sprint session of Firefox OS localization in Hindi. We have completed the Firefox OS localization in Hindi.. The entire team worked with full of dedication and enthusiasm. About 4000 submissions in a day :) Firefox OS in Hindi is ready for testing. Following people participated in todays sprint. Chandan. Ashish, Ranjan, Umesh, Vaibhav, Keshav, Komal and Shahid :) Regards Shahid HI Sahid and all It's very Great initiative by Candan and you. Very great work done by you people , i am glad ...

Firefox OS map support
Hi Reps, Will Firefox OS support only HERE maps only, or we will have support for Open Street Map too? KAMI ...

RTL support in Firefox OS
Hello! I'm working on making RTL support in Firefox OS first-class. Find the = details on the wiki: https://wiki.mozilla.org/L10n:B2G/RTL The plan is to first work with the localizers, users and UX designers = on a set of guidelines. This will allow us to better understand what = the desired experience should be. Once we have the guidelines written down on the wiki, we can start = testing Gaia and filing bugs against things that don't comply to the = guidelines. The tracking bug for this will be bug 906270: https://bugzil.la/906270 Things I'...

Web resources about - Partially self-built Firefox OS (was: Re: Supported locales in Firefox OS and OEMs) - mozilla.governance

Self Built Power Meter Uses Dual Sense Transformers
[Renaud] built a AC power meter from scratch. While commercial power meters like the Kill A Watt are available [Renaud’s] build gives an interesting ...

Self-built Earth Sheltered House Uses Natural Surroundings for Energy Reduction - Inhabitat New York ...
Self-built earth sheltered house in Upstate New York uses its natural surroundings to reduce energy consumption.

Self Built Interferometer Measures Nanometer Displacement
... from BluRay drives, mirrors from ebay and a 5mw laser diode. We’ve covered the use of interferometers before . But never an instrument built ...

Bowerbirds Members Record New Album in Self-Built Green Music Studio
Members of the indie band Bowerbirds have been trying their hand at sustainable design with this fantastic self-built studio project. Since 2007, ...

Resources last updated: 2/11/2016 7:10:46 AM