Re: Mozilla and the Shadow DOM

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 5:38 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 6:11 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
> wrote:
> > Thanks for the feedback! While the iron is hot I went ahead and
> > created/updated bugs in the tracker.
>
> A problem I have with this approach is that with Shadow DOM (and maybe
> Web Components in general) there's a lot of open bugs. Of those bugs
> it's not at all clear which the editors plan on addressing. Which
> makes it harder to plan for us.
>

This seems like something we can fix by bug triage. Both Hayato and I
periodically garden the bug tree (
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/showdependencytree.cgi?id=14978&hide_resolved=1
).

The process works as follows:

1) The bug tree is broken by categories of work, with each category being a
meta bug (title prefixed with [meta]).

2) As new bugs are filed, they end up at the bottom of the tree

3) Periodically, we triage these bugs at the bottom and mark them as
blocking meta bugs.

4) Those meta bugs that no longer have blocking bugs are closed as fixed.

To make it easier for you to track Mozilla-related bugs, we need to create
a meta bug, like I did a while back for custom elements:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/showdependencytree.cgi?id=20684&hide_resolved=0

Here's the new bug for Shadow DOM:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28491. I started added
things I know as blocking to it, please feel free to add those that I
missed.


>
> Also, a point that I forgot to make in my initial email is that
> Polymer makes it rather hard for us to ship any part of Web Components
> without all the other parts (and in the manner that Chrome implemented
> the features):
>
>   https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1107662


I am sure Polymer folks will be super-happy to help. Let's continue
discussion on your bug.

:DG<