On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 11:33 PM Yoav Weiss <yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote:
> That uptick may suggest a single large entity that started using this, and > may be easy to move to the new attribute. > Have you tried turning the usecounter into a UKM > <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:components/page_load_metrics/browser/observers/use_counter/ukm_features.cc;l=32?q=usecounter%20ukm&ss=chromium> > to try and see where the usage is coming from? > Agreed, that uptick is likely a single party. My hope is that it will go back down as that entity moves to the new attribute. Adding a UKM sounds like a reasonable idea - I'll do that if I don't see a down-trend in the usecounter data soon. > The other alternative is that some developer documentation is pointing at > the old attribute name. Can you verify that's not the case? > Indeed that's very likely. Our own blog post <https://web.dev/declarative-shadow-dom/> still describes the old attribute. (I'm working on getting that updated.) > Otherwise, we typically prefer to have deprecation messages with clear > milestones for their removal date. It seems to me that a year may be a lot > for this. Would you be comfortable with setting the removal date for 6 > milestones ahead? Maybe the UKM analysis can change our thinking here? > I'm reasonably comfortable with targeting 6 milestones out. That'd be roughly M118 as the last version that supports the old `shadowroot` attribute, and M119 as the first that doesn't. And closer to the deadline we can re-evaluate usage and make sure it's low enough for comfort. Does that sound reasonable? If so, I'll update the documentation and console messages accordingly. Thanks, Mason > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 6:38 PM Mason Freed <mas...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> >> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 5:19 PM Jason Robbins <jrobb...@google.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 10:14:48 PM UTC-8 >>> yoav...@chromium.org wrote: >>> +Jason Robbins - FYI, this didn't make it to the chromestatus tool. >>> >>> I have an idea about what went wrong. >>> >>> "Intent to deprecate" is the subject line that is expected for the first >>> stage in the deprecation process. It was detected as such, but that stage >>> does not require any review. Based on this thread and the contents of >>> the feature entry it looks like the final stage was what needed to be >>> reviewed. >>> >> >> Sorry - this was my fault. The stages of deprecation are kind of >> different, and the two options I had for this "deprecation" (not "removal") >> were "Draft Ready for Trial email" and "Draft Intent to Ship email". I >> chose the latter and renamed the subject line to "Intent to Deprecate". I >> hadn't realized we had tooling look at these emails. I guess the right >> thing was to choose the "Ready for Trial" email template, and not change >> the subject line. Perhaps a suggestion would be to rename those links or >> add help text explaining which one is appropriate at each stage for a >> deprecation/removal intent? >> >> Thanks, >> Mason >> >> >>> The final stage detects an intent email with the subject line "Intent to >>> ship" or "Intent to remove". The launching-features page uses "Intent to >>> ship" for the final stage of a deprecation, and when we generate the email >>> preview we use that subject line, but I'm guessing that it sounded wrong so >>> Mason edited it. >>> >>> It would probably be better if chromestatus generated a preview with the >>> subject line "Intent to remove" and we updated launching-features to use >>> that wording too. I am tracking the issue here: >>> https://github.com/GoogleChrome/chromium-dashboard/issues/2749 >>> >>> Thanks, >>> jason! >>> >>> >>> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAM%3DNeDjxoGAfpfBkPLdKJjGTV2T0bY4jnynhhNnEQ4bK%2BAnxKg%40mail.gmail.com.
