LGTM2
On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 3:11 AM Mike Taylor wrote:
> LGTM1 - looks like a useful addition already supported in a number of
> other RegExp engines.
> On 3/27/24 11:38 AM, 'Shu-yu Guo' via blink-dev wrote:
>
> Contact emails s...@chromium.org, pth...@chromium.org
>
> Explainer None
>
>
Thank you all!
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 8:23 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) <
yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote:
> LGTM3
>
> On Wednesday, March 27, 2024 at 3:29:57 PM UTC+1 Mike Taylor wrote:
>
>> LGTM2
>> On 3/26/24 10:53 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
>>
>> LGTM1. I think there is a small compat risk here
I've flipped all the reviews and will update this thread when they are all
completed.
Thanks!
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 8:25 AM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) <
yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote:
> Hey! Can you flip on the various reviews (privacy, enterprise, etc) in the
> chromestatus entry?
>
> On Tuesday,
LGTM1 - looks like a useful addition already supported in a number of
other RegExp engines.
On 3/27/24 11:38 AM, 'Shu-yu Guo' via blink-dev wrote:
Contact emails
s...@chromium.org, pth...@chromium.org
Explainer
None
Specification
On 3/25/24 12:44 PM, 'Paul Jensen' via blink-dev wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 2:02 PM Yoav Weiss (@Shopify)
wrote:
If I understand correctly what y'all are trying to do here, you're
trying to effectively recreate with GETs what should've been a POST.
Is the reasoning for that outlined
+1 to documenting Chromium's behavior in an evergreen format even if this
isn't formally specified. I am constantly getting questions from developers
about this and it is driving FUD about the capability of the web platform.
On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 7:47 PM Domenic Denicola
wrote:
> LGTM3.
>
>
I can't help thinking about all the problems exposed when malicious use
of Out of Sequence TCP became a thing among the evil-doers. It turned
out that once you split something up, it's not always easy to put it
back together again. It is a solved problem (but not quite, I found
newly
This being beyond the normal scope of an extension will require three
LGTMS so here is the first one:
LGTM1
I appreciate that it's not optimal in any way to have something like
this running this long, but I sympathize with the end result and
understand that App developers can need both
LGTM3
/Daniel
On 2024-03-27 16:16, Yoav Weiss (@Shopify) wrote:
LGTM2
On Tuesday, March 26, 2024 at 7:25:13 PM UTC+1 Akash Nadan wrote:
Hi Yoav, the reasoning behind this change is that there is a
privacy gap with the current attribution flow and position of the
source
Contact emails...@chromium.org, pth...@chromium.org
ExplainerNone
Specificationhttps://tc39.es/proposal-regexp-modifiers
Summary
RegExp modifiers adds the ability to locally modify the 'i', 'm', and 's'
flags inside a pattern. To enable a flag for a subexpression, use
`(?X:subexpr)` where X is
As a heads up, this wasn't caught in the API owner tooling, probably due to
the unconventional title.
+Jason Robbins - FYI
On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 9:33 PM mark a. foltz wrote:
> Contact emailsmfo...@chromium.org, bryantchand...@chromium.org
>
> ExplainerNone
>
> Specification
>
Hey! Can you flip on the various reviews (privacy, enterprise, etc) in the
chromestatus entry?
On Tuesday, March 26, 2024 at 11:29:53 PM UTC+1 Thomas Guilbert wrote:
> Contact emailstguilb...@chromium.org
>
> ExplainerNone
>
> Specification
>
LGTM3
On Wednesday, March 27, 2024 at 3:29:57 PM UTC+1 Mike Taylor wrote:
> LGTM2
> On 3/26/24 10:53 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
>
> LGTM1. I think there is a small compat risk here but it should be
> manageable via the combination of: low popover + dialog usage so far,
> presumably by
LGTM2
On 3/26/24 10:50 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
LGTM1, this is a very small change that IMO does not require any
signals or TAG review. It's just bringing this event in line with all
other events on the platform.
(It would be cool if there were some automated way of preventing this
kind
On Wednesday, March 27, 2024 at 3:50:08 AM UTC+1 Domenic Denicola wrote:
LGTM1, this is a very small change that IMO does not require any signals or
TAG review. It's just bringing this event in line with all other events on
the platform.
(It would be cool if there were some automated way of
LGTM2
On Tuesday, March 26, 2024 at 7:25:13 PM UTC+1 Akash Nadan wrote:
Hi Yoav, the reasoning behind this change is that there is a privacy gap
with the current attribution flow and position of the source deactivation
logic. The current position of the source deactivation logic makes it
LGTM2
On 3/26/24 10:53 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
LGTM1. I think there is a small compat risk here but it should be
manageable via the combination of: low popover + dialog usage so far,
presumably by actively-updated sites, and a Finch flag if something
breaks really badly.
On Wednesday,
Hello Blink-dev.
I would like to extend the ‘X-Requested-With in WebView Deprecation’ trial
until M138 in line with the premise made below in the Summary below. I am
asking for an extension of 12 milestones instead of the customary 6
18 matches
Mail list logo
