Hi all, Another quick update: we began the rollout to 50% stable today.
We will roll-out to 100% of Stable users on approximately Sept. 20th, 2023. Thanks, Kyra On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 3:48 PM Mike Taylor <miketa...@chromium.org> wrote: > I've filed https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1475667 > - it would be great if you both could give more context about your embedded > application, and how you deal with Safari and Firefox as comments in the > bug (same goes for anyone else facing this issue). > > thanks, > Mike > On 8/24/23 8:45 AM, Tim Williams wrote: > > We have the same situation as Junji here. > For us, it means that our solution would be broken across all websites > since the platforms are using our iframe URL and we have 0 ability to > inject code at their top Domain (nor do we want to). > On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 8:33:57 PM UTC+3 Junji Genesys wrote: > >> Our application has no access to the top-level context, so there is no >> way for us to include our third-party trial script in the top-level context. >> We basically provide Salesforce with our embedded client URL, and they >> use it to load and embed our client in their iframe. >> >> On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 11:30 AM Mike Taylor <mike...@chromium.org> >> wrote: >> >>> Yes, if you sign up for a 3rd party token and inject that into the site >>> embedding your iframe before your iframe is created, that will give you >>> access to unpartitioned storage (until the Deprecation Trial expires). >>> >>> Here's a demo that injects an 3P origin trial token then creates an >>> iframe: >>> >>> https://rogue-lace-join.glitch.me/ >>> >>> And the relevant source files: >>> >>> https://glitch.com/edit/#!/rogue-lace-join?path=index.html%3A9%3A8 >>> https://miketaylr.com/misc/3pspdt.js >>> >>> Feel free to reach out to me off-list to discuss more or if you have any >>> further questions. >>> On 8/22/23 11:40 PM, Yoav Weiss wrote: >>> >>> Is your application running script in the top level context? Since the >>> deprecation trial is implemented as a third-party origin trial, you may be >>> able to sign up as a third party. >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 22, 2023, 23:48 Junji Genesys <junji....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello Kyra, >>>> >>>> Thank you for communicating about the rollout plan for the storage >>>> partitioning. >>>> >>>> We've found that the new storage partitioning behavior has impacted our >>>> product, which is a web client application embedded in an iframe inside >>>> Salesforce and provides call center agents functionality such as handling >>>> phone calls. We use browser-based phone (WebRTC phone) that can pop out as >>>> a separate window, which communicates with the embedded client frame via >>>> localStorage and BroadcastChannel. The new storage partitioning restriction >>>> blocks this communication as our application is running as an embedded >>>> iframe with a top-level domain that differs from our browser phone running >>>> in a popped out window. Our browser phone does not work properly in that >>>> scenario, and as a result, users are not able to answer their calls. Many >>>> of our customers have started reporting this issue, and it is currently our >>>> top priority to address this issue given its time-sensitive nature. >>>> >>>> We've also learned about an existence of the experimental flag, two >>>> relevant enterprise policies and the deprecation trial for disabling this >>>> new change as a temporary measure. We're especially interested in the >>>> deprecation trial, but that can be activated only by the top-level domain >>>> site and there is no way for the embedded content in an iframe to activate >>>> the deprecation trial. >>>> >>>> I've contacted Salesforce support to see if they can sign-up and >>>> activate the deprecation trial, but they asked me to reach out to Chrome >>>> team to see if Chrome team can create a ticket with Salesforce and help >>>> them with the deprecation trial for unpartitioned third-party storage. >>>> >>>> Would you be able to work with Salesforce for the deprecation trial in >>>> their environment? >>>> Also, since you might have dealt with other third-party vendors before, >>>> what suggestions do you have on how to approach a situation like this? >>>> I greatly appreciate your prompt response and help on this matter. >>>> >>>> Thank you, >>>> >>>> Junji >>>> >>>> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 1:50:24 PM UTC-4 Kyra Seevers wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Quick update: we began the rollout to 10% stable today. >>>>> >>>>> The new rollout schedule is approximately: >>>>> Stable 50%: Aug 28th >>>>> Stable 100%: Sept 11th >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 11:18 AM Tim Williams <tim.j.w...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hey Mike, >>>>>> Thanks for the update! >>>>>> I totally understand your timing, and it's on us to blame for missing >>>>>> this out (or at least we thought that it would be together with the >>>>>> cookie >>>>>> update which was postponed several times). >>>>>> >>>>>> Anyway, I encourage you to postpone the timing until the trial bug >>>>>> will be fixed to enable us, and other developers who would like to use >>>>>> the >>>>>> trial meta tag to be able to do so. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>> >>>>>> On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 7:55:33 PM UTC+3 Mike Taylor wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for the bug report! We'll triage it in our regular meeting >>>>>>> tomorrow. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And yes, your understanding of the timing is correct (we've been working >>>>>>> on this project for 2+ years >>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/WXNzM0WiQ-s/m/l10NGhaoAQAJ>, >>>>>>> and in dev-trial since September >>>>>>> <https://developer.chrome.com/en/blog/storage-partitioning-dev-trial/> >>>>>>> of last year). Note that advancing to a higher percentage will depend on >>>>>>> the stability and web-compatibility of partitioned 3P storage. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>> On 7/30/23 12:04 PM, Tim Williams wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've submitted the following bug: >>>>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1468811 since >>>>>>> the trial isn't working while I did everything right. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Saturday, July 29, 2023 at 2:52:22 AM UTC+3 Tim Williams wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hey There, >>>>>>>> I am truly struggling to understand the timing here. >>>>>>>> Currently, the partitioning is under a flag. >>>>>>>> Are you saying that the flag would be turned on to 100% of Desktop >>>>>>>> and Android users on Sept 8th THIS YEAR?? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That's a huge and extremely fast change, wow. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thursday, July 27, 2023 at 10:33:01 PM UTC+3 Kyra Seevers wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> M115 is now being served at 100% on Desktop and Android. We will >>>>>>>>> begin the rollout to Stable 1% shortly - the approximate rollout >>>>>>>>> schedule >>>>>>>>> is now as follows: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Stable 1%: July 28th >>>>>>>>> Stable 10%: Aug 11th >>>>>>>>> Stable 50%: Aug 25th >>>>>>>>> Stable 100%: Sept 8th >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 11:52 AM Mike Taylor <mike...@chromium.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> No, we don't know with certainty. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> You can watch >>>>>>>>>> https://chromiumdash.appspot.com/releases?platform=Windows to >>>>>>>>>> see when 115 is being served to 100% for all platforms. Today it's >>>>>>>>>> at 50% >>>>>>>>>> for Windows, for example. >>>>>>>>>> On 7/26/23 5:39 PM, Jagadeesha B Y wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Do we know when does M115 will hit 100%? Exact date would help >>>>>>>>>> us to communicate on the storage partition impact to our customers. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 2:12:10 PM UTC-7 >>>>>>>>>> mike...@chromium.org wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/26/23 4:01 PM, Vi S wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kyra, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Per your message here ( >>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/24hK6DKJnqY/m/tu0i5OmhCAAJ) >>>>>>>>>>> it sounds like as of 7/26/2023, the Storage Partitioning change has >>>>>>>>>>> not >>>>>>>>>>> been released yet since M115 is not served to 100% of users. Is that >>>>>>>>>>> correct? My understanding of this message is that M115 is currently >>>>>>>>>>> served >>>>>>>>>>> to 12.5% of users and that once M115 is served to 100% of users >>>>>>>>>>> (which will >>>>>>>>>>> happen in the next ~4 weeks), only then will the storage partition >>>>>>>>>>> change >>>>>>>>>>> be rolled out in a gradual manner. Is this understanding accurate? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> That's correct. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Additionally, would you be able to provide an updated schedule >>>>>>>>>>> for the rollout of the storage partitioning change (similar to the >>>>>>>>>>> one >>>>>>>>>>> linked here: >>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/24hK6DKJnqY/m/Tts2gjrEBwAJ) >>>>>>>>>>> ? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Once we begin the gradual roll-out, we'll provide a estimated >>>>>>>>>>> rollout schedule on this thread (I hesitate to do so now - it's >>>>>>>>>>> hard to >>>>>>>>>>> know when we will begin exactly). >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 10:18:26 AM UTC-4 Kyra Seevers wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi there, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your email - as of today (Monday 7/24/23), the >>>>>>>>>>>> feature is not rolled-out to stable. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> However, I can confirm that the rollout schedule for this >>>>>>>>>>>> feature begins in M115 at Stable 1% (once M115 is served to 100% >>>>>>>>>>>> of users). >>>>>>>>>>>> M115 is currently served to 12.5% of users - you can track the >>>>>>>>>>>> status at >>>>>>>>>>>> https://chromiumdash.appspot.com/releases?platform=Windows. >>>>>>>>>>>> Two weeks after that, we'll go to 10%, assuming no large stability >>>>>>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>>>>>> compatibility regressions. Then 50 and 100% at additional 2 week >>>>>>>>>>>> increments. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In the meantime, we have a deprecation trial ( >>>>>>>>>>>> https://developer.chrome.com/blog/storage-partitioning-deprecation-trial/#participate-in-the-deprecation-trials) >>>>>>>>>>>> running in M115+ that allows sites who opt-in to maintain >>>>>>>>>>>> unpartitioned >>>>>>>>>>>> storage for a few milestones while they develop a >>>>>>>>>>>> storage-partitioning-compatible solution. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Kyra >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 7:05 PM Jagadeesha B Y < >>>>>>>>>>>> jaga...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I see that Chrome 115 release notes - >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5723617717387264 mentioning >>>>>>>>>>>>> about storage partition being enabled by default. Could someone >>>>>>>>>>>>> confirm >>>>>>>>>>>>> how gradual this rollout is? do we know if storage partition is >>>>>>>>>>>>> rolled out >>>>>>>>>>>>> fully? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Our SASS product has a heavy reliance on Shared worker and >>>>>>>>>>>>> this would break our customer use cases. We use shared worker to >>>>>>>>>>>>> co-ordinate Web RTC signalling and websocket management which is >>>>>>>>>>>>> critical >>>>>>>>>>>>> for the app. >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, May 31, 2023 at 8:42:15 AM UTC-7 >>>>>>>>>>>>> mk...@chromium.org wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> LGTM3 with all the caveats about careful rollout discussed >>>>>>>>>>>>>> above. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -mike >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 5:39 PM Mike Taylor < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mike...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OK - let's consider this I2S officially revived. Looking for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a 3rd LGTM to begin shipping in M115. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We have implemented 3rd party deprecation trial support for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> M115+ (see >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://developer.chrome.com/blog/storage-partitioning-deprecation-trial/#participate-in-the-deprecation-trials), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and extended the deprecation trial's expiration date >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accordingly to account >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the delay. And we have the Enterprise policy ready to go. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The rollout schedule will look something like the following, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pending metrics and compatibility stability: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> July 25th: 1% of Stable population (approximately 1 week >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after M115 is released) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aug 8th: 10% >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aug 22nd: 50% >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sep 5: 100% >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As always, if we discover significant user-facing breakage >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we'll explore pausing or rolling back to address. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/1/23 10:43 AM, Mike Taylor wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Rick and Yoav. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We learned from two partners (one internal, one external) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> late last week that a 3P deprecation trial would be needed for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> preserve widely-used functionality while they work on a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> migration strategy. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We're tracking the work in crbug.com/1441411 and hope to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have that ready by M115. Once we land the fix, I'll circle back >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and look >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a 3rd LGTM and have an updated rollout schedule. :) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/1/23 12:21 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LGTM2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 16:23 Rick Byers <rby...@chromium.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 2:02 PM Mike Taylor < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mike...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/26/23 9:36 AM, Mike Taylor wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > On 4/25/23 12:00 PM, Rick Byers wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> In terms of the standards / process piece, it looks as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if the spec >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> PRs have all stalled for several months. What do you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> necessary to get these unblocked and landed? As the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> last engine to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> implement this behavior, perhaps we shouldn't feel too >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compelled to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> block shipping on PRs landing? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was gently reminded offline that I didn't answer this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> part of your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question - oops. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right now it seems to me that the costs of landing these >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spec PRs is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> higher than we're willing to block on, given the requested >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> refactoring >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (and yes, it's unfortunate that 3 engines would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shipping essentially >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unspecced behavior, but that's where we're at). That said, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm happy to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> devote my few IC hours to pushing these along as a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personal project over >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the coming months. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Mike. I trust your and wanderview@'s judgement here >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - I know how hard y'all have been willing to work in the past >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right thing done in specs. Thanks for being willing to keep >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pushing in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parallel. But given two other implementations have already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shipped this, it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was clearly already a spec bug that the spec didn't reflect >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reality. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agree that we shouldn't block shipping a 3rd implementation on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spec >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> refactoring work. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LGTM1 to ship from my perspective. Obviously this will need >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a very thoughtful and careful roll-out. But I trust Mike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his team to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engage with impacted folks to make sure it goes smoothly, as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they did with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UA reduction. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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+...@chromium.org. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/bc52292b-9142-adad-d126-b93231468ed0%40chromium.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/bc52292b-9142-adad-d126-b93231468ed0%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+...@chromium.org. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/0e6d131f-f6c7-4bbb-ad3e-bd68cd63ec0dn%40chromium.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/0e6d131f-f6c7-4bbb-ad3e-bd68cd63ec0dn%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Kyra Seevers (she/her) | Software Engineer | >>>>>>>>>>>> kyras...@google.com | 859-537-9917 <(859)%20537-9917> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Kyra Seevers (she/her) | Software Engineer | kyras...@google.com >>>>>>>>> | 859-537-9917 <(859)%20537-9917> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>> 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+...@chromium.org. >>>>>> >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/4cf940ed-3dd6-4c49-91af-e6b7c7d42ac4n%40chromium.org >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/4cf940ed-3dd6-4c49-91af-e6b7c7d42ac4n%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+...@chromium.org. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/15914fe7-8e14-4580-b1f2-d038ddfba9d6n%40chromium.org >>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/15914fe7-8e14-4580-b1f2-d038ddfba9d6n%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+...@chromium.org. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfV9jqK7%2BA-W7A8tWK03vcaqS2onRymPzFxiVOPG1bGcSQ%40mail.gmail.com >>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfV9jqK7%2BA-W7A8tWK03vcaqS2onRymPzFxiVOPG1bGcSQ%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/CA%2BmmbXZyYR6u9k%3DO3%3DOEV0dpkm%3DzrC3uWy0Yf9oTYeTpSdobZw%40mail.gmail.com.
