content-owners

Thanks for asking about it. I'm also not that familiar with what is done in ContentMain, but I

Also chiming in late, after this came up in a recent CSA team discussion (also +creis@ and +lbrady@).

network doesn't depend on content. So I don't think that is an option is it? I probably would

Thanks everyone, sounds like the best way to handle this is to add a function on ContentBrowserClient

Yes... RFH will have a WebContents. There is also PageUserData which lets you organize some state..

//content is pretty complicated, and it encompasses a large portion of the overall functionality of

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Kelvin Jiang <kelvi...@google.com> Date: Wed,

Thanks Peter for summarizing and have a good OOO, I'll let Charlie comment on the re-entrancy

No worries, we've all gotten bitten by that auto-include feature of VSCode. It's awesome

Hi, we are ok with the plan. The nominees are: - Myself — I've read the guidelines and they seem

I guess I forgot https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/5677113 whereupon we had

I already lgtmd the first patch. Content is allowed to depend on //components. I think the second CL

Thanks for checking! In general, if there aren't specific owners for files or a directory, you

Hello, I'd like to add a new entry in //content/browser/DEPS for //components/unexportable_keys.

Thank you Lei, I thought the same, but since this approach seemed neater, I wanted to ensure first

I'm trying to get my head around the dependencies. My CL is https://crrev.com/c/6105882 wherein I

+WebUI Everywhere On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 11:02 AM Alex Yang <ayc...@chromium.org> wrote: We

Thanks Elias and Christian, it looks like everyone agrees. > Do we have any time estimate on when

For the record, the problem I was trying to solve turned out to be solvable without introducing this

Thanks for noticing! Fortunately, dtapuska@ already landed https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c

Thanks for the input Daniel and Kentaro! We'll go with option 3. On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 4:58 PM

As the Content API stores just as a static global you'll have to add one. I'm just saying you

Actually... I think I need to look into this a bit more. WebContentsDestroyed should have already

My apologies. We do avoid mixing them; I got confused as to their statuses. On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 11

Cool :) On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 2:42 PM Christian Biesinger <cbies...@google.com> wrote:

Wow fucking really can't believe it

On Friday, April 12, 2024 at 7:14:23 PM UTC-7 Peter Kasting wrote: Friendly ping. Are there other

This is saying that the WebContents object pointed to by content.web_contents may have been freed. I

Thanks for the feedback. It seems that the option 4: adding a callback parameter is supported by the

+Avi Drissman for context on this move to services. John--added you as a review to https://chromium-