LGTM
On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 3:29 PM 'Deepti Gandluri' via blink-dev <
blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote:
> Adding to Francis's reply, JSPI has been inherently hard to specify, and
> validate security requirements for given that it is somewhat sandwiched
> between JS & Wasm. Concretely, since the las
Adding to Francis's reply, JSPI has been inherently hard to specify, and
validate security requirements for given that it is somewhat sandwiched
between JS & Wasm. Concretely, since the last OT extension, the late
breaking changes have been merged into the specification and we've gotten
more signal
I also did not wish to have to extend the OT :)
We encountered a couple of issues:
1. We had some late breaking requests to modify the API; this is a
standards-track effort. I think that this sometimes happens when we are
about to finalize a spec!
2. We have had a few reports of exploitable bugs.
Hey Francis,
This feature is exciting, and I'm glad to see it moving forward. That said,
this extension would push the OT past a year, which is a bit of a concern.
Have you considered, perhaps, pushing forward with a gapless
intent-to-ship? If you're happy with the developer feedback to date, a
Thanks for all of this. I'm comfortable with the continuation given the
breaking change.
LGTM
On Thu, Oct 17, 2024, 10:36 AM Francis McCabe wrote:
> Hi Alex
> Some small responses:
>
> 1. We currently have around 120 OT registrants. We have had some informal
> feedback, including from Meet —
Hi Alex
Some small responses:
1. We currently have around 120 OT registrants. We have had some informal
feedback, including from Meet — who are planning to use JSPI as part of their
effort to migrate to WebGPU.
2. Agreed that we can ping Webkit now. Will do soon.
3. The process for the CG hing
Hey Francis,
A few small questions...:
- Is the OT documentation link correct?
- Have we requested a position from WebKit? Seems like we're far enough
along to start on that.
...and a few larger questions:
- If I understand this correctly, there was a *breaking* change in 129?
