Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: ServiceWorkerStaticRouterTimingInfo

2025-07-23 Thread Yoav Weiss (@Shopify)
LGTM3 On Wednesday, July 23, 2025 at 5:32:37 PM UTC+2 Daniel Bratell wrote: > LGTM2 but make sure that all PRs eventually land so they are not left in > limbo. > > /Daniel > On 2025-07-18 02:45, Keita Suzuki wrote: > > > Are all of the spec PRs for this feature landed? I see some of the items >

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: ServiceWorkerStaticRouterTimingInfo

2025-07-23 Thread Daniel Bratell
LGTM2 but make sure that all PRs eventually land so they are not left in limbo. /Daniel On 2025-07-18 02:45, Keita Suzuki wrote: > Are all of the spec PRs for this feature landed? I see some of the items you linked to are still open. The ServiceWorker spec has been landed, but the changes on

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: ServiceWorkerStaticRouterTimingInfo

2025-07-17 Thread Keita Suzuki
> Are all of the spec PRs for this feature landed? I see some of the items you linked to are still open. The ServiceWorker spec has been landed, but the changes on the Fetch spec and resource timing spec are not landed. This is because the fetch spec requires "At least two implementers are intere

Re: [blink-dev] Re: Intent to Ship: ServiceWorkerStaticRouterTimingInfo

2025-07-16 Thread Chris Harrelson
Hi, Are all of the spec PRs for this feature landed? I see some of the items you linked to are still open. Also the spec link for this feature goes to github, not to a published specification. On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 9:22 AM Alex Russell wrote: > Thanks for the helpful OT summary doc. LGTM1. >