W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > July to September 2013

Re: Vote on the data race issue and Gecko shipping timeline

From: Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 09:27:32 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJK2wqXOa4asD5kdH8tKpNfTC+vH6S5Gscb-HDAwO1vOZdWREQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>
Cc: Chris Lowis <Chris.Lowis@bbc.co.uk>, "public-audio@w3.org" <public-audio@w3.org>
Indeed, you are not really blocked, as the scope of change that would be
required in your implementation is no more (or less) than what will be
required in the other shipping implementations, depending on the vote.

I apologize for not spending time detailing the memory model further; I'm
on vacation until mid-next-week, and will not be looking at doing so until
then.


On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 11:39 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 9:18 PM, Chris Lowis <Chris.Lowis@bbc.co.uk>wrote:
>>
>>> I appreciate how frustrating it is to not be able to make progress, but
>>> given the strongly entrenched positions on some sides of this debate I
>>> think it's fair to say that the result of any vote will be divisive. While
>>> there may still be a possibility for us to reach consensus, or at least to
>>> have all options more clearly specified, we should hold off on the vote.
>>>
>>> Trust me, I want us to reach a decision on this issue and move on as we
>>> have so much work to do in other areas, but at this time of year (my
>>> co-chair is on leave for the next few days for example), we may need to
>>> continue to be patient.
>>>
>>
>> The problem is that our implementation is blocked on this. It doesn't
>> feel fair to block our implementation indefinitely while we try to reach
>> consensus with other browser vendors --- who are already shipping their
>> implementation!
>>
>
> OK we're not really blocked on it, since as Ehsan pointed out we can and
> will just go ahead and ship our current approach without doing too much
> damage to anyone, if we have to, since it's quite compatible with the
> current spec (as far as the spec goes). But of course that would be
> suboptimal :-).
>
> Rob
> --
> Jtehsauts  tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy  Mdaon  yhoaus  eanuttehrotraiitny  eovni
> le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o  Whhei csha iids  teoa
> stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d  'mYaonu,r  "sGients  uapr,e  tfaokreg iyvoeunr,
> 'm aotr  atnod  sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t"  uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n?  gBoutt  uIp
> waanndt  wyeonut  thoo mken.o w  *
> *
>
Received on Friday, 9 August 2013 16:27:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:03:23 UTC