Publish minutes of 2022-01-20 meeting #149
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
dotproto
reviewed
Jan 20, 2022
zombie
approved these changes
Jan 22, 2022
dotproto
approved these changes
Jan 25, 2022
_minutes/2022-01-20-wecg.md
Outdated
| * [carlos] Had previously raised this in the past. Created an issue because I believe this is something the group should do. | ||
| * [tomislav] The details are very implementation-specific, not sure if this is something that can be specified. | ||
| * [rob] Are we looking to clarify current behavior or attempt to standardize on a specific set of behaviors? | ||
| * [alexei] If everyone were to implement Mozilla's Limited Event page proposal ([issue 134](https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/134)), then we would not have this inconsistency. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| * [alexei] If everyone were to implement Mozilla's Limited Event page proposal ([issue 134](https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/134)), then we would not have this inconsistency. | |
| * [alexei] If everyone were to implement Mozilla's Limited Event page proposal ([issue 134](https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/134)), then we would not have this inconsistency. Still have not heard a satisfactory reason why Google opposes this. |
@ghostwords does this tweak look good to you?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, thank you!
I think the closest to an actual explanation thus far has been that Google cares about low-end devices, which, given that SWs will probably use more not fewer system resources overall, does not make any sense.
mukul-p
approved these changes
Feb 1, 2022
Rob--W
force-pushed
the
meeting-2022-01-20
branch
from
09a5b81
to
0c60556
Compare
|
I have included all suggested edits in the source doc and updated the PR here. I also noticed that the year of the header was off, so I have prepended a commit to fix up the date in the previous meeting notes. |
|
Since the meeting is tomorrow and the notes have been approved, with the review feedback included without changes, I'm going to merge this now. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Generated from https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QkwhEMtMS67JBUkl_WVPZ4lRSKoWcQNlLJSf_GwSXg8/edit using the tool and process from #105.
During this meeting we discussed or mentioned #144, #145, #146, #120, #19, #115, #147, #72, #88, #134.