Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Thanks for the updates Chris! On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 12:36 PM Chris Fredrickson wrote: > Hi all, > > We've concluded our metrics analysis, and are rolling this feature out to > 100% of Chrome Stable clients. (We mitigated one regression in browser > startup time, and confirmed that all other

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Hi all, We've concluded our metrics analysis, and are rolling this feature out to 100% of Chrome Stable clients. (We mitigated one regression in browser startup time, and confirmed that all other possible regressions were false positives.) Thank you for your patience. By way of other updates,

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Hi all, Our metrics analysis has identified a possible regression in some Core Web Vitals on Android. We have rolled out First-Party Sets to 10% on Stable, but are pausing the rollout here to collect more data and evaluate a proposed fix before rolling

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Hugo: no, we are still examining metrics and evaluating. I will post to this thread when I have updates. David: Yes, this implementation consumes the JSON blob from https://github.com/GoogleChrome/first-party-sets via Component Updater. (There's also an enterprise policy

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Is this I2S still using the externally managed JSON blob to identify first party sets, and shipping via Component Updater, i.e. there is not yet a dynamic way to specify First-Party Sets? On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 9:35 AM 'Hugo Bärtges' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Have we

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Have we reached the planned 100% of Chrome users by June 16th? On Wednesday, May 31, 2023 at 4:02:25 PM UTC+2 Andrey Lipattsev wrote: > Sweet, thanks Chris! > > On Tuesday, 30 May 2023 at 16:36:34 UTC+2 Chris Fredrickson wrote: > >> Hi Andrey, >> >> We're still collecting metrics at 1%. We want

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Sweet, thanks Chris! On Tuesday, 30 May 2023 at 16:36:34 UTC+2 Chris Fredrickson wrote: > Hi Andrey, > > We're still collecting metrics at 1%. We want to be sure that this feature > does not regress core web vitals , which is why > we're taking our time and analyzing

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Hi Andrey, We're still collecting metrics at 1%. We want to be sure that this feature does not regress core web vitals , which is why we're taking our time and analyzing thoroughly. I will post here when we roll out to 100% (which I expect to be soon, within the next

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

How far along is this now? Are we at 100%? On Wednesday, 17 May 2023 at 21:11:35 UTC+2 Chris Fredrickson wrote: > Thanks all. Just an update - we're rolling First-Party Sets out to 1% on > Chrome M113 Stable now, and plan to ramp up to 100% over the next few weeks > (barring metrics

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Thanks all. Just an update - we're rolling First-Party Sets out to 1% on Chrome M113 Stable now, and plan to ramp up to 100% over the next few weeks (barring metrics regressions). On Friday, April 7, 2023 at 12:45:41 PM UTC-4 Mike Taylor wrote: > After re-reading the spec, explainer, related

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

After re-reading the spec, explainer, related discussions, and related prior art over the past week or so, I believe that First Party Sets solves important use cases, especially in a post-third-party cookie world. LGTM3. On 4/7/23 11:36 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote: Given the above, LGTM2 On Wed,

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Given the above, LGTM2 On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 5:57 PM Alex Russell wrote: > Per today's OWNERS meeting, Daniel raised the point that we need a place > to approve/dispose the overall FPS direction rather than the smaller point > features, so for that reason I'm going to LGTM1 this here (contra

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Per today's OWNERS meeting, Daniel raised the point that we need a place to approve/dispose the overall FPS direction rather than the smaller point features, so for that reason I'm going to LGTM1 this here (contra Yoav's previous message). Best, Alex On Friday, March 31, 2023 at 8:31:10 AM

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Hi Martin, On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 12:32 AM Martin Thomson wrote: > As long as FPS affects how the web operates in any way, it should be > subject to standardization and - I would expect - the same review as any > other feature. > With the plan Yoav is suggesting, the Blink API owners would

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

As long as FPS affects how the web operates in any way, it should be subject to standardization and - I would expect - the same review as any other feature. Mozilla's view remains that this is not good for the web; we would very much prefer if this feature were not shipped in Chromium as we

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Thanks for filing this intent. I agree with your analysis that it's not directly web-exposed, and as such, I don't think LGTMs are required (but still appreciate the intent as required context for rSA and rSAF). We'll see if other API owners disagree. On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 10:31 PM Johann

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: First-party sets

Contact emails cfred...@chromium.org, shuu...@chromium.org, kaustub...@chromium.org, johann...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/WICG/first-party-sets Specification https://wicg.github.io/first-party-sets Design docs First-Party Sets: Initial prototype description