Obviously, extending an API is a long term commitment, so I can understand the Chrome team wanting to only do it if there is a decent benefit - "it makes my one extension with 10 users work slightly better" probably doesn't cut it.
Obviously, extending an API is a long term commitment, so I can understand the Chrome team wanting to only do it if there is a decent benefit - "it makes my one extension with 10 users work slightly better" probably doesn't cut it.
This is not at all how API proposals are handled. There are a lot more (time, financial, logical) barriers to a change like this. See the role of the W3C in this: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/11/manifest-v3-open-web-p...
bromite/build/patches/disable-AdsBlockedInfoBar.patch: https://github.com/bromite/bromite/blob/master/build/patches...
bromite/build/patches/Bromite-auto-updater.patch: () https://github.com/bromite/bromite/blob/master/build/patches...
- [ ] ENH,SEC,UPD: Bromite,Chromium: is there a url syntax like /path.tar.gz#sha256=cba312 that chromium http filter downloader could use to check e.g. sha256 and maybe even GPG ASC signatures with? (See also: TUF, Sigstore, W3C Blockcerts+DIDs)
Bromite/build/patches/Re-introduce-*.patch: [...]