Re: Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

2015-12-01 Thread Ehsan Akhgari
To close the loop here, I just enabled service workers on Firefox 44 (currently on Aurora.) Thanks to everyone who helped make this happen. It was a lng ride. :-) On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Ben Kelly

Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

2015-11-20 Thread Ben Kelly
In Firefox 44 we intend to enable Service Workers and FetchEvents by default on desktop and android. These features will not be enabled on Firefox OS yet. They has been developed behind the following preferences: dom.serviceWorkers.enabled dom.serviceWorkers.interception.enabled

Re: Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

2015-11-20 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 11/20/15 3:21 PM, Ben Kelly wrote: The spec is converging to a stable v1, but things are still changing. The core functionality has been stable for a while, though. OK. I guess my question is whether, for example, waiting for another release cycle would significantly improve things here

Re: Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

2015-11-20 Thread Ben Kelly
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > Another compat issue we need to fix is returning the same >> ServiceWorkerRegistration object repeatedly from certain APIs. This was >> something that changed a few times in both the spec and chrome. >> >> Fixing these

Re: Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

2015-11-20 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 11/20/15 3:42 PM, Ben Kelly wrote: No. I think what we have works on the sites/demos/wpt tests available today. We feel its compatible enough to ship. We'll fix further compat issues using our standard train model. OK. I think the best thing we can do right now is get a second

Re: Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

2015-11-20 Thread Brian Grinstead
Also, webconsole logging for Service Workers is preffed behind devtools.webconsole.filter.serviceworkers, which will be enabled by default in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1201962. Brian > On Nov 20, 2015, at 10:34 AM, Ben Kelly wrote: > > In Firefox 44 we

Re: Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

2015-11-20 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 11/20/15 1:34 PM, Ben Kelly wrote: Please let me know if you have any questions are concerns. I actually have a few questions. 1) How confident are we that the spec is stable/correct? 2) How confident are we that our implementation, Chrome's, and the spec all match? I know we were

Re: Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

2015-11-20 Thread Ben Kelly
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Ben Kelly wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > >> >> 1) How confident are we that the spec is stable/correct? >> > > The spec is converging to a stable v1, but things are still changing. The >

Re: Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

2015-11-20 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 11/20/15 3:26 PM, Ben Kelly wrote: I guess I should mention the biggest change in the spec that has not been implemented by either chrome or firefox. The spec now exposes the Response.url passed to the FetchEvent.respondWith() to the outer network request. So base URLs for stylesheets and

Re: Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

2015-11-20 Thread Ben Kelly
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > 1) How confident are we that the spec is stable/correct? > The spec is converging to a stable v1, but things are still changing. The core functionality has been stable for a while, though. > 2) How confident are we

Re: Intent to ship: Service Workers with FetchEvent

2015-11-20 Thread Robert O'Callahan
On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Ben Kelly wrote: > I think the best thing we can do right now is get a second implementation > into wide circulation. This will highlight compat issues yes, but also > help avoid baking chrome specific behavior into all the sites using