Hi, The API owners met to discuss this intent today (Chris, Yoav, Alex, Mike). We're glad to see you are still pursuing the API and responding to feedback with the v2 API.
However, 9 milestones is very long, much longer than we are typically comfortable with, and within the range where there starts to be substantial risk of burn-in. That combined with the v2 design being neither publicly available nor implemented yet, leads us to conclude that we can't support extending the current Origin Trial, since there is also no defined experimental justification for doing so. You can of course come back and ask for a new Origin Trial once v2 is public and implemented. We also discussed two other points: * There is the option of shipping a subset now, but we were not sure if there is a useful and stable subset that could be shipped. * If v2 were implemented now and you wished to transition the Origin Trial "smoothly" to the new API, that would have been reasonable to consider. Reason being the purpose of an Origin Trial is to experimentally fit an API to purpose, and a change to v2 is a strong signal that there was experimental feedback justifying it. Further, a breaking v2 API would reduce burn-in risk. Thanks, Chris, on behalf of the API owners On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 2:17 AM Glen Robertson <glen...@chromium.org> wrote: > Hi Blink Owners, > > We would like to extend the DGAPI OT further. Requesting an extension to > M96 (inclusive). > > Note: that is 9 milestones total (8 on CrOS), some of which are the new > shorter milestones. Also CrOS won't ship M95. > > We now have an updated API design <http://go/dgapi2> in internal review > (sorry, Google only for now). I plan to update the public explainer once > the design is internally approved, then start on implementation of a > revised "v2" API. I expect implementation to take another milestone at > least, but like before we can't make promises about getting the engineering > part done within a tight timeline. When that is ready, we will want to > start an OT on that revised API. > > Also M94 (the existing post-end milestone) has already branched - do we > need to merge something to ensure DGAPI OT is not turned off for M94? > > Thanks > -Glen > > On Fri, 14 May 2021 at 10:19, Matt Giuca <mgi...@google.com> wrote: > >> Thanks Alex and Yoav. >> >> On Fri, 14 May 2021 at 05:24, Alex Russell <slightly...@chromium.org> >> wrote: >> >>> SGTM too; LGTM! >>> >>> On Monday, May 10, 2021 at 3:54:37 AM UTC-7 Yoav Weiss wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 10:35 AM Matt Giuca <mgi...@chromium.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks for the explanation, Yoav. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, we are talking about 6 milestones total (note: 5 milestones on >>>>> Chrome OS, which is where a lot of our customers are targeting, since we >>>>> missed the first milestone there). >>>>> >>>>> As said above, we are anticipating a V2 origin trial at some point in >>>>> the future. We think we'll have a pretty solid design by the end of the >>>>> quarter (that's roughly corresponding to the start of M94) but we simply >>>>> can't promise that V2 will be implemented by then. When we get to M94, I >>>>> think it is likely that we'll need to further extend the existing origin >>>>> trial, but we should have a much better picture of the work required by >>>>> then. Another possibility is that we ship all or part of the current API >>>>> to >>>>> general availability (if it is determined that the new changes are >>>>> additions, rather than changes, to the existing API). >>>>> >>>> >>>> Ideally, at that point you would have well-documented learnings from >>>> the OT that you could use to justify either a decision to ship some parts >>>> of the API, or change it towards a second OT. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sorry if this is vague, but I am trying to keep our options open and >>>>> make sure that we aren't making promises we can't keep. My point above >>>>> stands, that I don't want to set hard engineering deadlines which, if we >>>>> don't meet them, will result in the disappearance of the API for our >>>>> customers. We are not trying to keep this API in origin trial forever, but >>>>> we need time to work towards a solution. >>>>> >>>> >>>> The above SGTM! >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Matt >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, 10 May 2021 at 15:30, Yoav Weiss <yoavwe...@chromium.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In that case, we're talking about 6 milestones all in all? That >>>>>> sounds perfectly reasonable. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 6:43 AM Glen Robertson <glen...@chromium.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Sorry, I made a mistake in my original email in this thread: we >>>>>>> actually delayed the start of the OT so I had the milestones wrong. >>>>>>> Corrected milestones follow: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Experimental timeline* >>>>>>> - M88(Android)/M89(Desktop): First experiment milestone >>>>>>> - M90: Original final experiment milestone >>>>>>> - M93: Extended final experiment milestone >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, 7 May 2021 at 23:19, Aer Berkopec <aerberkope...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, May 7, 2021, 3:44 AM Yoav Weiss <yoavwe...@chromium.org> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hey Matt, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The main goals for the duration restrictions that Alex mentioned >>>>>>>>> is to avoid cases where Origin Trials are being used as a "soft >>>>>>>>> launch" >>>>>>>>> mechanism and to avoid prematurely baking in the feature into the >>>>>>>>> platform. >>>>>>>>> Significant changes to the API shape (as the ones you allude to >>>>>>>>> with the V2 API) would provide some assurances against bake in, and >>>>>>>>> from my >>>>>>>>> perspective would "restart the clock". >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> However, that doesn't mean that breaking the API every X >>>>>>>>> milestones would enable y'all to have it in OT forevermore. We also >>>>>>>>> want to >>>>>>>>> see that the OT is being used to provide us with meaningful feedback. >>>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>>> believe that's the reason Alex asked for a summary of lessons >>>>>>>>> learned, as >>>>>>>>> well as a plan to eventually ship this. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 9:37 AM Matt Giuca <mgi...@chromium.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Alex, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the notes from your meeting. I think we can create a >>>>>>>>>> summary of the proposed design changes (however, note that it's >>>>>>>>>> somewhat >>>>>>>>>> undecided at this stage, what specific changes will need to be >>>>>>>>>> made). I >>>>>>>>>> don't want to block the extension of the origin trial on having a >>>>>>>>>> design >>>>>>>>>> proposal, since that could jeopardize customers' ability to use the >>>>>>>>>> API. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Does the 8-milestone run include the planned future "V2 API" >>>>>>>>>> origin trial, (i.e. if we run this for another 3 milestones, we'll >>>>>>>>>> only >>>>>>>>>> have 2 milestones left to do a V2 origin trial)? Or do you mean 8 >>>>>>>>>> milestones without making changes to the API. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I think the latter would be pretty reasonable, but as I'm sure >>>>>>>>>> I've said before, I'm not too comfortable having a hard deadline on >>>>>>>>>> having >>>>>>>>>> to ship a new API or losing it. Having hard deadlines for shipping >>>>>>>>>> features, especially one this complex, generally results in rushed >>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>> buggy experiences. If we, say, get to M95 and have a working >>>>>>>>>> implementation >>>>>>>>>> for V2, but discover a bug at the last minute, I want to be able to >>>>>>>>>> have no >>>>>>>>>> hesitation to punt the release for an additional milestone (I don't >>>>>>>>>> want us >>>>>>>>>> to feel compelled to push it out the door because of an arbitrary >>>>>>>>>> 8-milestone limit). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We definitely don't want you or other feature teams to rush to >>>>>>>>> ship features that are not ready. What I'd generally recommend is for >>>>>>>>> you >>>>>>>>> to have a rough plan for exiting the experimentation phase, and to >>>>>>>>> come >>>>>>>>> back to the API owners if e.g. last minute extensions are needed. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'll note that I raised this issue for this specific API in a >>>>>>>>>> general discussion with Blink API Owners in November 2020 (email >>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-api-owners-discuss/c/_VsWsXMlezY/m/jTjGda60CwAJ>). >>>>>>>>>> Relevant quotes from myself from that email: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Until this work is done, we're not comfortable shipping this API. >>>>>>>>>>> We think backwards-incompatible changes may be required. But we >>>>>>>>>>> want to get >>>>>>>>>>> it into the hands of developers before then. An origin trial lets >>>>>>>>>>> us do >>>>>>>>>>> that, but it's got a soft time limit (3 milestones), after which >>>>>>>>>>> time we'll >>>>>>>>>>> have to apply for an extension. Maybe that's fine, because we have >>>>>>>>>>> specific >>>>>>>>>>> questions we'll still want answered. But it seems a little unfit for >>>>>>>>>>> purpose, because we aren't using the OT to answer those questions, >>>>>>>>>>> we're >>>>>>>>>>> just extending it to keep things working while we do design work >>>>>>>>>>> behind the >>>>>>>>>>> scenes. >>>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>> If API owners are happy with us ... repeatedly extending the >>>>>>>>>>> origin trial, without specific experimental questions, until we >>>>>>>>>>> have done >>>>>>>>>>> the internal research / spec work required to ship, then I think we >>>>>>>>>>> can do >>>>>>>>>>> without origin keys. My proposal was essentially an attempt to >>>>>>>>>>> formalize >>>>>>>>>>> that behaviour, rather than having to apply for all of these >>>>>>>>>>> exemptions and >>>>>>>>>>> extensions when they come up. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Now I didn't get a response to that email at the time. The >>>>>>>>>> context was that we were asking for a formal "origin keys >>>>>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rQFoxVEOHBAYGz0DL0eSUur-DWN90o42OzFtEmcAO-Q/edit>" >>>>>>>>>> system, and in that meeting, I was told that it wouldn't be necessary >>>>>>>>>> because origin trials are suitable for that purpose. Per my final >>>>>>>>>> paragraph >>>>>>>>>> there, it *may* not be that origin trials are suitable for this >>>>>>>>>> purpose, if in practice API owners are going to block origin trial >>>>>>>>>> extensions. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To be clear, we aren't intending to extend this indefinitely. I >>>>>>>>>> am hoping we can have this API shipped some time this year. But I am >>>>>>>>>> flagging that we can't guarantee that we'll have the necessary >>>>>>>>>> changes made >>>>>>>>>> by a specific milestone, and I don't want to be hard-bound to make >>>>>>>>>> those >>>>>>>>>> changes by a specific date. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Matt >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 7 May 2021 at 05:34, Alex Russell < >>>>>>>>>> slightly...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hey all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Met today at API OWNERS to discuss. I don't think folks are >>>>>>>>>>> *necessarily* opposed to extending this, but a few things jump >>>>>>>>>>> out: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> - 8 milestones as at the far end of how long we'd like any >>>>>>>>>>> OT to run >>>>>>>>>>> - Given that, it would be helpful to summarize both a plan >>>>>>>>>>> for what the new API will look like as well as lessons learned >>>>>>>>>>> to date >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I know that some of that is captured in the DGAPI bugs linked, >>>>>>>>>>> but it would help if there were a summary document that described >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> developer feedback to date, the changes you'll be making to the API >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>> compensate, and the plan for (hopefully) validating the new API >>>>>>>>>>> works as >>>>>>>>>>> developers expect quickly, then launching or sunsetting. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, May 6, 2021 at 8:30:38 AM UTC-7 Glen Robertson >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Contact emails >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> mgi...@chromium.org, glen...@chromium.org, rous...@chromium.org >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Explainer >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/blob/master/explainer.md >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Specification >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> None >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Design docs >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/WICG/digital-goods/blob/master/explainer.md >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jbt2Mzt-xg1cWVlFScBQsoX_pE8Kg1gYpulxUSV8FM0/edit >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Summary >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> An API for querying and managing digital products to facilitate >>>>>>>>>>>> in-app purchases from web applications, in conjunction with the >>>>>>>>>>>> Payment >>>>>>>>>>>> Request API (which is used to make the actual purchases). The API >>>>>>>>>>>> would be >>>>>>>>>>>> linked to a digital distribution service connected to via the user >>>>>>>>>>>> agent. >>>>>>>>>>>> In Chromium, this is specifically a web API wrapper around the >>>>>>>>>>>> Android Play >>>>>>>>>>>> Billing API. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Blink component >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Blink>Payments >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EPayments> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Search tags >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> payments <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:payments>, >>>>>>>>>>>> billing <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:billing> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> TAG review >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/571 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> TAG review status >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In progress >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> RisksInteroperability and Compatibility >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Similar to Payment Request: this API is used to talk to >>>>>>>>>>>> specific store backends, and so its usage is tailored to the >>>>>>>>>>>> specific >>>>>>>>>>>> store. The reason it's a proposed web standard is so that the same >>>>>>>>>>>> code >>>>>>>>>>>> (which is specific to one store) is portable across browsers. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Gecko: No signal ( >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/349). >>>>>>>>>>>> Awaiting feedback. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> WebKit: No signal >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Web developers: Positive ( >>>>>>>>>>>> https://discourse.wicg.io/t/proposal-web-payments-digital-product-management-api/4350 >>>>>>>>>>>> ) >>>>>>>>>>>> Ergonomics >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Used in tandem with the Payment Request API. >>>>>>>>>>>> Goals for experimentation >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - General API design. Determine whether developers need to >>>>>>>>>>>> access more data that would be exposed through the Play Billing >>>>>>>>>>>> API but is >>>>>>>>>>>> not exposed through our web API. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - Specifically, we would like to know whether the API is >>>>>>>>>>>> suitable for abstracting over other non-Play stores. While running >>>>>>>>>>>> an >>>>>>>>>>>> experiment with the current implementation won't tell us this, it >>>>>>>>>>>> will set >>>>>>>>>>>> up real-world clients and we can then try their sites on other >>>>>>>>>>>> implementations. >>>>>>>>>>>> Experimental timeline >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - M87 (2020-11-17): Experiment begins >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - M90 (2021-04-13): Original experiment end date >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - M93 (2021-08-31): Extended experiment end date >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Reason this experiment is being extended >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> An origin trial ran from M87 to M90 and found some areas of >>>>>>>>>>>> developer friction and new features needed (see bugs labeled >>>>>>>>>>>> DGAPI >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=label%3ADGAPI>). >>>>>>>>>>>> We haven't yet had time to fix all the issues and update the API. >>>>>>>>>>>> We are >>>>>>>>>>>> planning to update the API and run a next phase of the experiment >>>>>>>>>>>> with a v2 >>>>>>>>>>>> API soon. We would like to avoid stopping the experiment in >>>>>>>>>>>> between the >>>>>>>>>>>> phases to avoid unnecessarily disrupting current users of the API >>>>>>>>>>>> while we >>>>>>>>>>>> work on the next iteration. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Ongoing technical constraints >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> None >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms >>>>>>>>>>>> (Windows, Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> No, Android and Chrome OS only (the two platforms where we have >>>>>>>>>>>> Play Store integration). >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >>>>>>>>>>>> ? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> No >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Flag name >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> None >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tracking bug >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://crbug.com/1061503 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Launch bug >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://crbug.com/1017947 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5339955595313152 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Links to previous Intent discussions >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Intent to prototype: >>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/vkS3k30lWNs >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Intent to Experiment: >>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/syI9_M9dANY/m/3lt-QGMHAgAJ >>>>>>>>>>>> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.chromestatus.com/>. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> 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/CAHqYdcYbiwZYA6atQ%3DsN6nkaT6M-7avGhOBdwjA373PG%3DCq2cg%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAHqYdcYbiwZYA6atQ%3DsN6nkaT6M-7avGhOBdwjA373PG%3DCq2cg%40mail.gmail.com?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/CAL5BFfW657p0WOQSZeJtJdNz%2Bo5EYdy8q7uJDfb%3D05MUXtLLSg%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfW657p0WOQSZeJtJdNz%2Bo5EYdy8q7uJDfb%3D05MUXtLLSg%40mail.gmail.com?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/CAPV%2BSg_pU3Q59ZcBVDyY-TFDmhUjW_3e6wqPRfWLZDqJER_r4Q%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAPV%2BSg_pU3Q59ZcBVDyY-TFDmhUjW_3e6wqPRfWLZDqJER_r4Q%40mail.gmail.com?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/CAOMQ%2Bw-%2BxFNrx2p9cvvJBLFsekTuduguJB_twz%3D1-f-7gxzx0g%40mail.gmail.com.
