Support CEF 3.3202.1686.gd665578 / Chromium 62

[perlun]

This is an umbrella release to support the Chromium 62 version in CefSharp, which I think a lot of you are waiting for.

Some of the known issues thus far:

• Upgrade to 3.2924.1575.g97389a9 / Add support for Visual Studio 2017 cef-binary#46 - publish cef.redist and cef.sdk packages. This work has been started by @peters but is not fully completed yet. (and his PR is using an old CEF version as well.) I think we take the simpler approach in Upgrade to CEF 62 cef-binary#53 for now.
• Upgrade cef.sdk dependency in CefSharp, making required changes as needed - merged in Upgraded to CEF 62 #2203.
• Javascript Bound objects no longer registered after cross-site navigation #1203 - JS bindings are no longer working as expected. Fixing this might be postponed to post-62.0.0 release, see this comment and use the 👍 and 👎 to cast your vote.
• Perhaps other things, not yet noted.

Fixes we get for free because of the upgrade:

• Closes PDF scrolling with mouse wheel not working #1916: PDF scrolling with mouse wheel not working
• Closes BrowserSubprocess memory leak + crash. #2170: BrowserSubprocess memory leak + crash.
• Closes WebGL software rendering is broken in CefSharp 57 #2182: WebGL software rendering is broken in CefSharp 57
• Probably a bunch of others, see https://github.com/cefsharp/CefSharp/releases/tag/v62.0.0-pre01 for the full release notes.

---

Update: Prerelease packages are available on nuget.org, please ensure to check the "Include prereleases" checkbox in the NuGet settings in Visual Studio.

[mjbrookecub]

Hiya, any ideas on when this is likely to be ready? I've found a bug with the version of cef that v57 is using and am looking forward to that being resolved.

[perlun]

Hiya, any ideas on when this is likely to be ready?

ASAP. 😄 Hopefully rather soon, but because of the nature of the project it's difficult to make promises at this stage. We'll let you and everyone else eagerly waiting know as soon as it's ready, for sure.

[SilverDragon135]

CEF 62 probably fixes #1916 too.
I had scrolling problems in winforms too in case I was scrolling during the loading - fixed with CEF 62 for me.

[perlun]

Thanks @SilverDragon135, added it to the list.

[perlun]

Chrome 63 was recently released. We should probably re-target this to go with CEF 63 instead.

If someone wants to do the initial work of bringing it into cef-binary, by all means, be my guest!

[muffmolch]

thus.. no cefsharp for 62?

[perlun]

thus.. no cefsharp for 62?

Not yet, no. We could make a release but it still has the #1203 bug present which will prevent some people from using it.

Please vote on this comment: 👎 if you want to have a 62 release asap, or 👍 if you'd rather wait some extra time but get a 63 release instead. Nothing is free in this world, everything takes a bit of time and it would be nice to hear your feedback before spending time on this.

I will base my decision on your feedback. I personally would prefer the 63 approach (since it seems silly to release a version which is already outdated at the time of release), but I'm very open to your opinions also.

[Cansii]

Current Cefsharp release version (57) have stability issue (probably #2170) so we got many stabily issues on our latest product version. It may leads to security issue for ours systems, so I realy hope you can release new stable version soon.
If not, I have to revert to last realy stable release (53 for me).
Thanks a lot for your great job.

[muffmolch]

question is: is version 63 really uptodate when the new CEFVersion gets released ;-)

[perlun]

@Cansii

Current Cefsharp release version (57) have stability issue (probably #2170) so we got many stabily issues on our latest product version. It may leads to security issue for ours systems, so I realy hope you can release new stable version soon.

Stability issues is one thing, I know about #2170, but security issues? Are we not mixing things up a bit here?

I understand if people have problems with 57, that's fine. I think bumping the release to use 63 doesn't really have to be that much work to be honest though, so I am leaning towards that route since everyone will thank me for doing so in the long run... 😉

[Cansii]

@perlun

Stability issues is one thing, I know about #2170, but security issues? Are we not mixing things up a bit here?

As I said, stabilty issue leads to some security issues in my product. Uncatchable exceptions lead to a app crash. And my app need to be running continuously (to ensure kiosk mode).

So, I probably have to reingeneer my app architecture, but this is not a mixing...

I agree, in the long run, 63 is better.

You know the time cost of this choice. But you ask, so I give you my anser. ;)