Re: [w3c/ServiceWorker] Allow caches to opt-in to granular cleanup (#863)

(Some random thoughts, with the caveat that I might be missing context from the F2F discussion.)

If there aren't going to be any changes to the relevant standards' status quo, I am not sure that it makes sense to move away from Workbox's current model (IDB for timestamp metadata + the Cache Storage API for the `Response` bodies), given that it's a mature solution at this point.

My main concern going into this is that it locks folks into using Workbox (or [`ngsw`](https://angular.io/guide/service-worker-intro), which is the only other "service worker-y" framework that I'm aware of that's implemented cache expiration).

But perhaps if the official guidance is that IndexedDB should be used for this sort of thing, someone from the community see that as an opportunity to write a standalone helper library to implement storage and expiration. That could then end up being an alternative for folks who would rather not opt-in to using a framework like Workbox or `ngsw`.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/issues/863#issuecomment-433933338