| Summary: | Should we remove legacy RTCPeerConnection callback API? | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | youenn fablet <youennf> |
| Component: | WebCore Misc. | Assignee: | Nobody <webkit-unassigned> |
| Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | ||
| Severity: | Normal | CC: | adam.bergkvist, agouaillard, alex, eric.carlson, gsnedders, jonlee, pnormand, sam |
| Priority: | P2 | ||
| Version: | WebKit Nightly Build | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| See Also: |
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=167617 https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=169646 |
||
| Bug Depends on: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 143211 | ||
|
Description
youenn fablet
2016-10-31 01:00:18 PDT
I don't think we can do that. These callbacks are also documented in the spec [1]. [1] https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-pc/archives/20160913/webrtc.html#legacy-interface-extensions You cannot remove the API, but the specs leaves the freedom to make it but a wrapper around the promise API leaving only one implementation to maintain. See how navigator.getUserMedia is implemented (vs MediaDevices.getUserMedia) (In reply to comment #2) > You cannot remove the API, but the specs leaves the freedom to make it but a > wrapper around the promise API leaving only one implementation to maintain. > See how navigator.getUserMedia is implemented (vs MediaDevices.getUserMedia) This is how the RTCPeerConnection legacy callback API is implemented currently as well. Is there anything left here? Should we close this as WONTFIX? I am not sure this is WONTFIX. WebKit hasn't shipped yet the feature so we have some freedom here. The legacy APIs are wrappers around the promise-based APIs which are also evolving. Probably legacy services need to be updated according these internal changes so I would think they could/are migrating to promise-based APIs. WebRTC WG recently removed getStats legacy API. We should at least do that. bug 181480 disabled it by default and bug 189040 removed it entirely; forward duping to the latter given that totally removed it *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 189040 *** |