Re: Intent to implement & ship: support for a subset of -webkit prefixed CSS properties & features

2016-05-13 Thread Daniel Holbert
On 05/13/2016 10:49 AM, Jet Villegas wrote: > If I'm reading the dependency list correctly, we still plan to uplift to > 48 if we can get bug 1264905 fixed in time. Is that correct? bug 1264905's fix (a pref-unguarding) was just landed, as well. We could uplift both, if we *also* uplift bug

Re: Intent to implement & ship: support for a subset of -webkit prefixed CSS properties & features

2016-05-13 Thread Jet Villegas
If I'm reading the dependency list correctly, we still plan to uplift to 48 if we can get bug 1264905 fixed in time. Is that correct? --Jet On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Daniel Holbert wrote: > On 12/30/2015 10:40 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote: > > Estimated or target

Re: Intent to implement & ship: support for a subset of -webkit prefixed CSS properties & features

2016-05-13 Thread Daniel Holbert
On 12/30/2015 10:40 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote: > Estimated or target release: > Firefox 46 (current Nightly), or 47 if we need to hold it back a > release to fix things. > > Preference behind which this will be implemented: > layout.css.prefixes.webkit Following up on this -- this feature

Re: Intent to implement & ship: support for a subset of -webkit prefixed CSS properties & features

2015-12-31 Thread Jonas Sicking
Yay! (I agree that it's sad that we need to do this, but still "yay" for being more compatible with the web). / Jonas On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote: > Summary: > A good chunk of the web today (and particularly the mobile web) > effectively

Re: Intent to implement & ship: support for a subset of -webkit prefixed CSS properties & features

2015-12-31 Thread Martin Thomson
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote: > Summary: > A good chunk of the web today (and particularly the mobile web) > effectively relies on -webkit prefixed CSS properties & features. We > wish we lived in a world where web content always included >

Re: Intent to implement & ship: support for a subset of -webkit prefixed CSS properties & features

2015-12-31 Thread Tantek Çelik
Daniel, Mike, and the whole compat team, thank you for diligently figuring out all the nasty details here and pushing this contentious "feature" forward. This is a tough balance for the good of our users, and I'm grateful for all the thought and careful consideration you have put into it. We

Re: Intent to implement & ship: support for a subset of -webkit prefixed CSS properties & features

2015-12-31 Thread Martin Thomson
On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 8:15 AM, Daniel Holbert wrote: > (3) False positives: There are many "legitimate" ways that authors can > use prefixed properties Yep, you convinced me with this. ___ dev-platform mailing list

Re: Intent to implement & ship: support for a subset of -webkit prefixed CSS properties & features

2015-12-31 Thread Daniel Holbert
On 12/31/2015 11:37 AM, Martin Thomson wrote: > If we intend to continue to support these, (We do.) > and particularly if we > anticipate more prefixed rules in future (Happily, I don't anticipate too many more of these -- at least, the space of -webkit-prefixed features is bounded, because

Re: Intent to implement & ship: support for a subset of -webkit prefixed CSS properties & features

2015-12-31 Thread Daniel Holbert
On 12/31/2015 01:15 PM, Daniel Holbert wrote: > (1) Dubious effectiveness: [...] > (2) Dubious usefulness: Given that these prefixed features will now > Just Work in Firefox, and given that we're saying they're de-facto part > of the web & committing to supporting them (and so are all other