On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Ehsan Akhgari <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2015-01-21 8:20 PM, Francois Marier wrote: > >> On 22/01/15 13:20, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: >> >>> On 2015-01-21 2:27 PM, Steve Workman wrote: >>> >>>> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/Contextual_Identity_ >>>> Project/Containers >>>> <https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/Contextual_Identity_ >>>> Project/Containers> >>>> >>>> We're currently doing some user research to figure out how we might do >>>> this best. >>>> >>> >>> Obviously there is a ton of UX level stuff that we need to figure out, >>> and I think that wiki page does a good job discussing them. But it's >>> also discussing appId here, which confuses me. What do containers and >>> appId have to do with each other? Based on reading the UX proposal >>> there, my intuition is that this feature will be implemented on top of >>> separate profiles, perhaps that's not what was intended? >>> >> >> Containers would be implemented on top of appId (or a similar mechanism) >> so that it's lightweight and that things like bookmarks and history are >> shared. >> > > It does make the implementation a lot more challenging, since I suspect > very strongly that the existing appId support will not be enough. > ... but a good start and good enough for a prototype to get feedback. > > User profiles would be a revamped version of browser profiles: >> >> >> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/Contextual_Identity_ >> Project/User_Profiles >> >> A separare profile would be best yes, but being able to quickly open up >>>> an isolated, disposable, fresh session could be useful for developers. >>>> >>> >>> I completely agree, but that doesn't preclude the usage of a new >>> profile, right? >>> >> >> The perceived disadvantages of using a different profile in this case >> were: >> >> - you need to create a profile on disk, just to trash it later >> > > Why is that a bad thing? Profile creation should not be very expensive... > But you still have to go through the steps of creating a new profile. A contained window would be fewer clicks. Unless, of course, we had a single click option for a disposable profile. > > - you can't share history and bookmarks >> > > You could fix this though by copying the places db into the new profile, > right? (The problem would be much harder to handle if we wanted to retain > other kinds of customizations and not just history and bookmarks... Do we?) > You could, but then you'd have the issue of keeping them sync'd. > > - a new Firefox process is started per profile >> > > Why is this a bad thing? Increased memory usage. > > > _______________________________________________ > dev-privacy mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-privacy > _______________________________________________ dev-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-privacy
