review for browsingData API extension

[Timo Reimann]

Hello,

I volunteered to implement issue 78093 (Add/extend API to enable Local Storage management for extensions) and put together an API proposal (which I actually consider as an extension to the existing browsingData API).

Please have a look and let me know about your feedback.

Thanks

Timo

[Mustafa Emre Acer]

Thanks! I've added some comments for security.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to apps-dev+u...@chromium.org.

[Dominic Battre]

Hi.

I had time to take a look at your proposal. Overall I would be happy to see this but I wonder whether you are aware of what you would be signing up to.

Take a look at chrome/browser/browsing_data/browsing_data_remover.cc for a list of backends that are supported for clearing browsing data by time. For each of these backends you would need to add a query operation and a filter by domain operation. That's a seizable amount of work. It would probably also require some refactoring so that all components that can store browsing data support a common interface to query and clear it.

Best regards,

Dominic

On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 12:26 AM, Timo Reimann <ttr...@googlemail.com> wrote:

Hello,

I volunteered to implement issue 78093 (Add/extend API to enable Local Storage management for extensions) and put together an API proposal (which I actually consider as an extension to the existing browsingData API).

Please have a look and let me know about your feedback.

Thanks

Timo

-- 

Google Germany GmbH - Dienerstr. 12 - 80331 München - Germany

Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg
Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Christine Elizabeth Flores

[Timo Reimann]

Hi Dominic,

thanks for reviewing, and for providing a rough outline of the scope.

I absolutely wouldn't mind committing to the larger task that you described (especially since I've tackled a few smaller Chromium issues already). My sole motivation to go for the issue is for fun and profit. Given a bit of time and support from the Chromium folks end, I'm dedicated to pull it through.

I have responded to all comments on the document. Let me know if there's anything else I can do to hopefully get the needed LGTMs.

Best

Timo

[Dominic Battre]

+Adding OWNERs of chrome/browser/browsing_data

Hi Timo,

did apps-dev and security-enamel give their LGTM?

Best regards,

Dominic

[Timo Reimann]

+meacer

Hi Dominic,

not yet. meacer@ had a thorough look at it, including a number of comments that we have all resolved by now.

I believe I haven't heard anything from apps-dev so far.

Thanks

Timo

[Mustafa Emre Acer]

Security lgtm. Thanks!

[Timo Reimann]

Can I ask apps-dev to have a look as well and ideally give their LGTM? Thanks!

[λ Ken Rockot]

Looks mostly good! Please see comments inline comments.

[Jeffrey Yasskin]

I basically like the proposal too.

[Timo Reimann]

Thanks for the additional feedback, and apologies for the late response on my end. I went offline for quite a while and thus couldn't address the latest comments easily. I did so just now though, and will be happy to finalize any pending discussions to hopefully wrap up the proposal.

Timo

[Timo Reimann]

Hey all,

it seems to me there's just one issue left pending on the proposal before I can move forward implementing. May I ask for another final look and some LGTM please? :)

(Ken Rockot and Jeffrey Yasskin, I believe you were last in sharing feedback on the yet unresolved issue.)

Thanks

Timo

[λ Ken Rockot]

Woops, sorry. Thought that had been resolved. In general I don't feel strongly about the mapping direction in question and I agree with the rationale of your inline reply. So LGTM!

[Timo Reimann]

Awesome -- thanks big time, Ken.

Could someone please add the proposal to the Chrome API tracking master document with status 2:coding. (or give me permission to do so -- I can't seem to request it myself)? For convenience, here's the link to the proposal again.