Hi All, We are facing the same problem as others. We have chrome extension page in a Iframe on top of another web apps. When the *"Block third-party cookies"* is turned on, we are getting the following error:
*"DOMException: Failed to read the 'localStorage' property from 'Window': Access is denied for this document."* As per this link Storage Partitioning - Chrome for Developers <https://developer.chrome.com/en/docs/privacy-sandbox/storage-partitioning/#extension-apis>, we've already set the host permissions for all the web apps, and Extension uses Manifest v3. Only way to make it work is turn "Block third party cookies" off. It used to work before regardless of the state of "Block third-party cookies". I am looking forward to your response, thanks for your cooperation. Regards. On Thursday, 5 October 2023 at 12:22:51 UTC-7 Kyra Seevers wrote: > Hi Illia, > > Thanks for reaching out - does this bug answer any of your questions?: > https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1481485&q=reporter%3Ame&can=1 > > If not, could you please file a bug describing your set-up here: > https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/entry, and add the label > "Proj-StoragePartitioningTrial" and cc kyras...@chromium.org? > > In the bug, please include information about your extension set-up - does > the extension have host permissions for each of the websites? Is it > Manifest v2 or v3? > > Thanks, > Kyra > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 8:19 AM Illia Kyselov <donc...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I hope this message finds you in good health. I am reaching out to seek >> your expertise in helping me solve a problem. >> >> Our app incorporates an extension that aids users in accruing information >> from diverse sites, a feature that is instrumental in social network and >> business development, among other applications. A crucial aspect of this >> function is the user's ability to open the extension and add contacts >> without the need to log in in our app in extension at each individual >> website (as login information is stored in Local Storage). >> >> From my understanding, we cannot use the option >> DisableThirdPartyStoragePartitioning because our extension has to work >> across all websites. >> >> This leads me to question if there is no immediate solution to this >> problem. Does this imply we need to contemplate workarounds, potentially >> affecting the user experience of our app? >> >> I eagerly await your advice on this matter. Your assistance and >> contribution are greatly appreciated. Thank you for your continued support. >> >> Best regards. >> >> On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 5:01:12 PM UTC+3 Kyra Seevers wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Quick update: the ThirdPartyStoragePartitioning feature flag is now >>> enabled by default in Canary. We will be rolling out to 100% Stable shortly. >>> >>> Manish - could you please file a bug describing your set-up here: >>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/entry, and add the label >>> "Proj-StoragePartitioningTrial". Also, have you looked into our deprecation >>> trial in the meantime?: >>> https://developer.chrome.com/en/blog/storage-partitioning-deprecation-trial/ >>> . >>> >>> Thanks all, >>> Kyra >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:56 AM Manish Bisht <manish....@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Is this enabled by default to chrome dev without the use or feature >>>> flag ? >>>> >>>> Also is there any example of host_permissions that is mentioned here >>>> <https://developer.chrome.com/en/docs/privacy-sandbox/storage-partitioning/#extension-apis> >>>> because >>>> I don't think this is working with the chrome flag enabled. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> On Monday, September 25, 2023 at 6:57:16 PM UTC+5:30 Kyra Seevers wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Wanted to keep the thread updated and confirm that we have not shipped >>>>> to Stable 100% yet. We will be delaying another day or two due to >>>>> internal delays. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Kyra >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 8:53 AM Kyra Seevers <kyras...@google.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Chinmay, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for reaching out! Due to internal delays, we won't be rolling >>>>>> out to Stable 100% likely until the end of the week or the beginning of >>>>>> next week. I'll keep the thread updated with any further delays. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Kyra >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 7:50 PM Chinmay Manchanda <cmanc...@tyro.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Kyra, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Do we have an update on what time the feature will be rolled out >>>>>>> today? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> Chinmay >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tuesday, 12 September 2023 at 18:06:57 UTC+10 Kyra Seevers wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Muhammad, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have filed this bug for the issue: >>>>>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1481485. We >>>>>>>> would appreciate it if you could describe your set-up with more detail >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>> this bug. Have you registered for the deprecation trial described >>>>>>>> here?: >>>>>>>> https://developer.chrome.com/en/blog/storage-partitioning-deprecation-trial/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> Kyra >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 10:48 PM Muhammad Ahmed Mallick < >>>>>>>> amal...@folio3.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi All, >>>>>>>>> I'm also facing challenges with the current situation. We're >>>>>>>>> loading my own website within the Chrome extension, and we manage the >>>>>>>>> user's login state (tokens) on my website. The extension's iframe is >>>>>>>>> supposed to retrieve the token from local storage, but it's currently >>>>>>>>> broken. It's not feasible to ask the user to log in twice just to >>>>>>>>> access >>>>>>>>> the extension's content. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please let me know if there is any solution to get it fixed asap. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>> Ahmed >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 6, 2023 at 2:03:55 PM UTC+5 Kyra Seevers >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 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 <mike...@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> >>>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Kyra Seevers (she/her) | Software Engineer | kyras...@google.com >>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>> kyras...@chromium.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> Kyra Seevers (she/her) | Software Engineer | kyras...@google.com | >>>>>> kyras...@chromium.org >>>>>> >>>>> > > -- > > Kyra Seevers (she/her) | Software Engineer | kyras...@google.com | > kyras...@chromium.org > -- 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/46bacb9b-db4b-49f1-b0f2-943a87659bc9n%40chromium.org.
