Respond to comments on WPT fixes for OPFS
Categories
(Core :: DOM: File, defect, P3)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: jesup, Assigned: jesup)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file, 1 obsolete file)
|
(deleted),
text/x-phabricator-request
|
Details |
|
Assignee | |
Updated•2 years ago
|
|
|
Assignee | |
Comment 1•2 years ago
|
||
|
||
Updated•2 years ago
|
|
|
||
Comment 2•2 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9297598 [details]
Bug 1794128: Clean up WPT tests for OPFS move() when there's something in the destination r=#dom-storage-reviewers
Revision D158844 was moved to bug 1794129. Setting attachment 9297598 [details] to obsolete.
|
|
Assignee | |
Comment 3•2 years ago
|
||
Also updates the error to InvalidModification
|
||
Updated•2 years ago
|
|
||
Comment 6•2 years ago
|
||
Backed out for causing wpt failures on FileSystemFileHandle-move.https.any.worker.html
- Backout link
- Push with failures
- Failure Log
- Failure line: TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | /fs/FileSystemFileHandle-move.https.any.worker.html | move(name) when there is a file at the destination fails - promise_test: Unhandled rejection with value: object "TypeError: navigator.storage.getDirectory is not a function"
|
||
Comment 8•2 years ago
|
||
There's a r+ patch which didn't land and no activity in this bug for 2 weeks.
:jesup, could you have a look please?
If you still have some work to do, you can add an action "Plan Changes" in Phabricator.
For more information, please visit auto_nag documentation.
|
||
Comment 10•2 years ago
|
||
Backed out for causing wpt failures on FileSystemFileHandle-move.https.any.worker.html
|
||
Updated•2 years ago
|
|
||
Comment 11•2 years ago
|
||
Hi Jari, once bug 1792674 will be fixed, is there anything left to do here? Reland Randell's patch?
|
|
||
Comment 12•2 years ago
|
||
The working group arrived at the conclusion that OPFS should overwrite without questions (see whatwg/fs/pull/10) to align with the posix convention. To avoid overwriting, applications can check for name conflicts before attempting a move.
The tests in the patch are for the old behavior (where an error was expected) and can probably be safely archived.
Description
•