Understood, thanks for the response Francisco, Fernando and Ben! Maybe the bigger issue here is whether or not we should somehow allow about: URLs to be loaded into FxOS? I don't think it make sense for re-do every about: page UI in the FxOS org since Platform team already did it once?
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 1:46 AM, Francisco Jordano <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi there, > > as Ben mentioned there is a new effort from the devtools team to provide > tools for debugging the new features that platform is building. > > IIRC, Eddy is working on the new tools under about:debugging that will be > the umbrella for debugging addons, workers, serviceworkers, etc. > > We still don't have it available for FxOS, so IMO, we should keep the > current implementation in Settings that provide basic functionality for > developers, and remove that implementation as soon about:debugging is > available for Firefox OS. > > Cheers, > F. > > On 10 November 2015 at 14:04, Ben Kelly <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 2:32 AM, Tim Guan-tin Chien <[email protected] >> > wrote: >> >>> Somehow it was decided about:serviceworker in Settings app should be >>> engineered with a chrome/content event to System app and an IAC channel to >>> Settings app: >>> >>> >>> https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/gaia/blob/3180bbe2f2e94809c1fcef0e92a01da99cdfb530/apps/system/js/about_service_workers_proxy.js#L21-L29 >>> >>> When, per previous threads, we should just implement a >>> ServiceWorkerManager API accessible from Settings app. >>> >> >> Is it really necessary to have this panel in settings app vs providing >> the information via devtools? >> >> The main issue with the previous settings app service worker panel is >> that it could run the service worker script in the wrong content process. >> For example, when you click the update button it would launch the service >> worker script for appId X in the settings content process with appId Y. >> This would then cause security checks to fail and kill the content process. >> >> If necessary we can surface a small interface to settings app, but I >> would strongly suggest that it be limited in scope. We should not expose >> the full nsIServiceWorkerManager interface. It would also need to include >> IPC to the parent process to work properly. >> >> >>> Unless there are counter-arguments unknown to me, I would like to >>> organize work and do this conversion. >>> >> >> We are planning to revisit our service worker e10s design for b2g at the >> December work week. I would recommend waiting to do any major changes >> until after that session. >> >> Ben >> > >
_______________________________________________ dev-fxos mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxos
