LGTM1 for that plan

On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 12:48 PM Henrik Boström <h...@chromium.org> wrote:

> In that case the proposal is:
> - Add deprecation warning in M113 (Release: May 2, 2023) with the
> possibility to opt-in to the Deprecation Trial.
> - Throw an exception if the trial is not used in Canary/Dev/Beta in M114.
> - Throw an exception if the trial is not used in Stable in M119 (Release:
> October 31, 2023).
> - Let M121 be the last version where the Trial is available (Release:
> January 9, 2024). In other words the first version where the trial and
> legacy getStats API is entirely removed is M122 (Release: February 6, 2024).
>
> On Thursday, February 23, 2023 at 11:38:48 AM UTC+1 Yoav Weiss wrote:
>
>> SGTM
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 11:34 AM Henrik Boström <h...@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thursday, February 23, 2023 at 11:03:44 AM UTC+1 Yoav Weiss wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 12:52 PM Henrik Boström <h...@chromium.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> OK, so deprecation warning in M113, throwing in Beta in M114 and
>>> throwing in Stable on M119. We can do that.
>>>
>>>
>>> Awesome!
>>>
>>>
>>> Under this less aggressive timeline, for how many more milestones would
>>> the Deprecation Trial span?
>>>
>>>
>>> How much would be needed for people to schedule the work to make the
>>> switch?
>>>
>>>
>>> If they notice the deprecation warning they would have enough time to
>>> migrate before the Deprecation Trial is even needed. If they don't, how
>>> about 3 months extra?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I do not have any more deprecations planned on my end and I think this
>>> is "standalone" enough (stats being rather specific) that in my opinion it
>>> should not be bundled together with anything else.
>>>
>>>
>>> OK, cool!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 8:52:56 AM UTC+1 Yoav Weiss wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey Henrik!
>>>
>>> I think the general outline of the plan makes sense, but the timelines
>>> seem too aggressive. As we've recently seen in the track stats removal,
>>> there can be a time difference between the point a developer puts in the
>>> work to opt-in for a deprecation trial and the point in which this work
>>> reaches users.
>>>
>>> I think it would make sense to:
>>> * Add a deprecation warning in M113 and enable a Deprecation Trial. Set
>>> a tentative removal milestone for M119.
>>> * Start throwing an exception up to Beta in M114 to try and get people's
>>> attention
>>> * Broadly communicate this change is coming in multiple channels. DevRel
>>> folks may be able to help there. +Paul Kinlan <paulkin...@google.com>
>>>  and +Andre Bandarra <andre...@google.com> for thoughts.
>>> * In parallel to the above, turn the usecounters into UKM
>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:components/page_load_metrics/browser/observers/use_counter/ukm_features.cc;l=14?q=usecounter%20ukm&ss=chromium>,
>>> and try to see where most usage lies. (and try to understand if it's coming
>>> from libraries with longer deployment lifecycles)
>>> * Flip the switch (and be ready to revert) in M119
>>>
>>> I know this is a bit longer and more work than the plan you outlined,
>>> but given the few fire drills we had recently, it seems better to err on
>>> the cautious side.
>>>
>>> Also, do you know if more removals are planned on your side? It seems
>>> like it'd be better to "bundle" them so that library authors only have to
>>> "respin" their deployment once, rather than every few milestones.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 3:10 PM Henrik Boström <h...@chromium.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> *This deprecation is not to be confused with the track stats deprecation
>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/NZVXsJQ7tV8>, which
>>> is deprecating a small subset of the modern API. This deprecation related
>>> to the removal of the legacy API, a different API with the same name.*
>>>
>>> *Contact emails*
>>> h...@chromium.org, h...@chromium.org
>>>
>>> *Specification*
>>> The legacy getStats() API has no spec, no official documentation and no
>>> web platform tests.
>>>
>>> The modern (promise-based) version of getStats() does have a spec, but
>>> this is a different method returning different stats objects:
>>> https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-stats/
>>>
>>> There are lots of similarities between the modern and legacy APIs,
>>> including several metrics that are the same, but the stats report structure
>>> is different and the legacy API contains several "goog"-prefixed metrics or
>>> metrics that behave differently from the modern API.
>>>
>>> In 2019, a document was created outlining the differences between the
>>> legacy and modern API
>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1z-D4SngG36WPiMuRvWeTMN7mWQXrf1XKZwVl3Nf1BIE/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>  which
>>> may still be a useful resource, but for latest information we refer to the
>>> modern API's spec <https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-stats/> and code search
>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/webrtc/api/stats/rtcstats_objects.h>
>>> .
>>>
>>> *Summary*
>>> WebRTC is a set of JavaScript APIs (spec
>>> <https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-pc/>) enabling real-time communication,
>>> most notably realtime audio and video for Video Conferencing in the
>>> browser. getStats() is an API that allow apps to measure things like
>>> bitrate and media quality information about the session.
>>>
>>> The history is that spec and implementations evolved so quickly that the
>>> API was forked into two paths: the callback-based one that only exists in
>>> Chromium and has no spec and the promise-based one which has both a spec
>>> and pretty good cross-browser compatibility support
>>> <https://wpt.fyi/results/webrtc-stats/supported-stats.https.html?label=experimental&label=master&aligned>
>>> .
>>>
>>> In Chromium, the legacy API has been on feature freeze for several years
>>> and the goal was always to deprecate and remove it, but due to high usage
>>> this was not a possibility. This story is finally changing: usage graphs
>>> <https://webrtchacks.github.io/chromestatus/?buckets=1058,1476,1402&start=2022-01-01&window=7>
>>> .
>>>
>>> [image: Screenshot 2023-02-16 at 13.43.40.png]
>>>
>>> According to chromestatus.com stats
>>> <https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/popularity>,
>>> - RTCPeerConnectionGetStatsLegacyNonCompliant is 0.0183% and
>>> - RTCPeerConnectionGetStats is 0.2177% of page loads.
>>> In other words, legacy is 8% as popular as modern.
>>>
>>> According to UMA stats,
>>> - RTCPeerConnectionGetStatsLegacyNonCompliant is 0.000177% and
>>> - RTCPeerConnectionGetStats is 0.00114% of page loads.
>>> In other words, legacy is 15% as popular as modern.
>>>
>>> I don't know why UMAs and chromestatus shows different orders of
>>> magnitude when it comes to usage, but we're roughly talking about the
>>> legacy API being 1/10th as popular as the modern API. I think it is time to
>>> add a deprecation warning to the legacy API.
>>>
>>> *Risks*
>>> Usage is still high and migrating from the legacy API to the modern API
>>> may require a significant amount of work from developers.
>>>
>>> To mitigate this, we should have a long deprecation timeline and allow
>>> developers to opt-in to a Deprecation Trial to get more time.
>>>
>>> *Proposal*
>>> Add a deprecation warning in M113 and the possibility to opt-in to a
>>> deprecation trial.
>>> Add use counts for how many of the legacy API uses do and do not use the
>>> deprecation trial and track this over time.
>>>
>>> In M114, start throwing an exception in Canary/Beta if attempting to use
>>> the legacy API outside the trial *but do not throw* in Stable yet. Give
>>> apps more time to sign up to the trial.
>>>
>>> In M115, gently roll out the throwing of the exception to Stable, i.e.
>>> from this milestone onwards apps are required to use the deprecation trial
>>> if they want to continue to use the legacy getStats() API.
>>>
>>> M115 is Stable on June 27.
>>> Set the Deprecation Trial end date to M120 / December 5, 2023.
>>> This gives apps paying attention to the deprecation warning ~9 months to
>>> migrate and apps only paying attention to exceptions on stable ~6 months to
>>> migrate.
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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/8edb3ad3-c383-4c18-9595-
>>> 81fb0732fa10n%40chromium.org
>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/8edb3ad3-c383-4c18-9595-81fb0732fa10n%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>>>

-- 
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/CAL5BFfXvoddJYizkHGzmavf6LLyqxY1VGLfZfW%3D%2BrmZBBHNq8Q%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to