1429734 - Please create Core :: DOM: Bindings

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(bugzilla.mozilla.org :: Administration, task)

Description

[Anne (:annevk)]

Suggested values:

  Name: "DOM: Bindings (IDL)"
  Product: "Core"
  Description: "Issues with our Web IDL implementation"
  Triage lead: "[e-mail]"

I don't think we want any of the other fields in https://wiki.mozilla.org/BMO/Requesting_Changes#Components changed though maybe someone wants to volunteer for suggested reviewer?

Comment 1

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

I think we should have suggested reviewers.  Those should be peterv, me, qdot at least.  Maybe mystor and mccr8 if they're interested.

Comment 2

[Nika Layzell [:nika] (ni? for response)]

I'm open to being on the suggested list (however, I'm not currently in the allowed reviewer whitelist in the commit hook).

Comment 3

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

That whitelist is for changes to web-facing .webidl files; I hope it doesn't cover Codegen.py and other parts of the actual binding implementation... and if it does we should fix that.

Comment 4

[Andrew McCreight [:mccr8]]

I haven't really worked on CodeGen.py for years so I don't think I'd be a good suggested reviewer. Of course, I'd be open to taken more reviews in this code as kind of a secondary reviewer if that makes sense.

Comment 5

[Andrew McCreight [:mccr8]]

Should that say "(WebIDL)" instead of "(IDL)" in the name? In Gecko world, "IDL" is  ambiguous.

Comment 6

[Andrew McCreight [:mccr8]]

Also, maybe in the description "WebIDL" instead of "Web IDL"? I see the former more often in our code, like: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/WebIDL_bindings  But maybe that's outdated.

Comment 7

[Nika Layzell [:nika] (ni? for response)]

(In reply to Boris Zbarsky [:bz] (no decent commit message means r-) from comment #3)
> That whitelist is for changes to web-facing .webidl files; I hope it doesn't
> cover Codegen.py and other parts of the actual binding implementation... and
> if it does we should fix that.

Oops - I misread what the description read. We might want to make it more clear in the name that this isn't the component for the `.webidl` bindings themselves, but rather for the code which implements them.

Comment 8

[Emma Humphries ☕️🎸🧞‍♀️✨ (she/they) [:emceeaich] (Pacific Time) use needinfo]

I'm creating this as:

Core::DOM: Bindings (WebIDL)
Issues with code implementing WebIDL, <strong>not</strong> WebIDL itself
Triage: [e-mail]
Reviewers: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

I wasn't sure if that was an enthusiastic consent from mccr8 or not. If so I can go back and add.

Comment 9

[Cameron McCormack (:heycam)]

(In reply to Andrew McCreight [:mccr8] from comment #6)
> Also, maybe in the description "WebIDL" instead of "Web IDL"? I see the
> former more often in our code, like:
> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/WebIDL_bindings  But maybe
> that's outdated.

It doesn't matter too much, but the official spec title is "Web IDL" with a space. :-)

Comment 10

[Anne (:annevk)]

Thanks Emma (and everyone else for their improvements)!