Developer discussion for Creative Commons technology and tools

["Nathan R. Yergler" <nathan AT creativecommons.org>]

Luis Villa wrote:
> On 1/22/07, Nathan R. Yergler <nathan AT creativecommons.org> wrote:
> > I admittedly didn't do much testing without MozCC installed v. with it
> > installed, but rather between the old and new version.  So I'll take a
> > look as well and see if its something I might have missed.
>
> FWIW, I've been using mozcc religiously (given the conflict, I
> disabled operator, not mozcc ;) so my first comparison was between old
> and new mozcc.

So I've taken another look at this and haven't been able to track down 
anything firm.  Experimenting with MozCC 2.3.9 v. No-MozCC, there *may* 
be a subtle difference in load speed for mail.google.com, but not enough 
that I think I'd notice if I weren't looking for it.  No noticeable 
difference looking @ tieguy.org/blog (which I believe is one of the 
sites you said displayed the behavior).  Anyone know of a way to 
instrument Firefox to get firmer numbers on things like this?

Its a little difficult to track down what's going on with the extension 
on gmail, since there's so much content generated with Javascript.  But 
in an effort to streamline things I did a build of MozCC with no console 
logging at all.  You can find it at 
http://mirrors.creativecommons.org/software/mozcc/download/mozcc-2.3.9.1.xpi. 
 Let me know if it does a better job in terms of performance.

Thanks,

Nathan

> Luis
>
> > Luis Villa wrote:
> > > On 1/22/07, Nathan R. Yergler <nathan AT creativecommons.org> wrote:
> > >> An updated version of MozCC is now available for testing.  Version 
> > 2.3.9
> > >> is a recommended update as it resolves a number of outstanding issues
> > >> including:
> > >>
> > >> * Rewrite of the RDFa extraction engine which no longer pollutes
> > >> Javascript prototypes
> > >> * Performance enhancements when extracting RDFa from documents
> > >> * Interoperability fixes with other extensions
> > >
> > > For what it is worth, Nathan, this fixes the interoperability problems
> > > I had with Operator[1] but the new plugin seems to completely degrade
> > > ffox performance on most of the pages I used- took several times
> > > longer to load my blog and mail.google.com. This happens with or
> > > without Operator installed, so it isn't the result of an interaction
> > > with Operator.
> > >
> > > Is anyone else seeing this? I don't have time (class shortly) to
> > > uninstall/disable *all* of my plugins, but I'm guessing if Nathan
> > > didn't see it it must be an interaction with some other plugin, so
> > > I'll have to back everything out later tonight if no one else is
> > > seeing it.
> > >
> > > Luis
> > >
> > > [1] https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/4106/
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cc-devel mailing list
> > > cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel
> >
> >
> > --
> > Nathan R. Yergler
> > Senior Software Engineer
> > Creative Commons
> >
> > http://wiki.creativecommons.org/User:NathanYergler


--
Nathan R. Yergler
Senior Software Engineer
Creative Commons

http://wiki.creativecommons.org/User:NathanYergler