Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Latest two versions of Safari should be fully supported in legacy plugin #13921

Closed
7 tasks done
nickmccurdy opened this issue Jul 22, 2023 · 6 comments
Closed
7 tasks done

Comments

@nickmccurdy
Copy link
Contributor

nickmccurdy commented Jul 22, 2023

Describe the bug

I noticed the legacy plugin uses this Browserslist query: last 2 versions and not dead, > 0.3%, Firefox ESR

Unfortunately, because of how Browserslist works, this only includes some of the last 2 major versions of Safari, since last 2 versions only includes the last 2 minor versions, and > 0.3% excludes some minor versions due to low usage.

I suggest using last 2 major versions and not dead, > 0.3%, Firefox ESR instead. This could potentially expand supported browser usage by 2.7% in the US. If you'd like I can send a PR.

Reproduction

https://browsersl.ist/#q=last+2+versions+and+not+dead%2C+%3E+0.3%25%2C+Firefox+ESR

Steps to reproduce

  1. Run Browserslist query
  2. Note that Safari versions >= 15 and < 16.5 are missing

Suggested labels

  • bug
  • plugin: legacy

Validations

@romainmenke
Copy link

Please don't make this change.
It is incorrect.

Safari majors are just marketing versions.

Safari minors contain web engine features and have multiple releases a year, just like Chrome major versions.

@nickmccurdy
Copy link
Contributor Author

nickmccurdy commented Jul 22, 2023

It is incorrect.

No, I've proven statistically that Safari majors are more similar to majors in other browsers: https://github.com/orgs/browserslist/discussions/781#discussioncomment-6516951

Safari majors are just marketing versions.

All browser versions are marketing versions! The resulting browser compatibility is more important.

Safari minors contain web engine features and have multiple releases a year, just like Chrome major versions.

This only helps for comparing updates at a basic level, but isn't practical in this case. If this argument were valid, fixing it wouldn't increase the market share of supported Safari versions!

@romainmenke
Copy link

romainmenke commented Jul 22, 2023

If the intention is to cover a percentage of users you should change the browserslist query to a >n% query.

These are two different kinds of queries and both have a specific purpose.

Changing it to an >n% query is a valid request.

But please don't change it to major safari as a flawed proxy for a wider user base.


No, I've proven statistically that Safari majors are more similar to majors in other browsers: https://github.com/orgs/browserslist/discussions/781#discussioncomment-6516951

With all due respect, this is untrue.

This is from an actual WebKit engineer working at Apple : web-platform-dx/web-features#173 (comment)

@nickmccurdy
Copy link
Contributor Author

This discussion is already continuing elsewhere in web-platform-dx/web-features#264 and facebook/docusaurus#9173. I'll skip copying replies to here for now to reduce notifications, until a maintainer or other contributor wants to reply.

@sapphi-red
Copy link
Member

The last 2 versions part is to give less used browsers a fair chance to increase their usage (https://github.com/browserslist/browserslist#:~:text=If%20you%20want,setting%20with%20caution). Given that the Safari minor releases are shiped at similar intervals as Chrome, I think the last 2 versions is fine.

This could potentially expand supported browser usage

This is not relevant as the intent of the last 2 versions part isn't to expand the supported browser usage. Moreover, last 2 versions and not dead, > 0.3%, Firefox ESR includes more lower Safari version (14.1, iOS 12.2, ...) than the second-to-last major version (15.0), so the second-to-last major version will be supported indirectly.

Also this is just a default and users can expand the range if they want to.

@sapphi-red
Copy link
Member

Closing as I think the current default is fine.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 27, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants