Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jOMod-0003gP-Ng for pgadmin-support@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 14:45:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jOMoc-0003qt-E2 for pgadmin-support@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 14:45:30 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jOMoc-0003qm-2d for pgadmin-support@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 14:45:30 +0000 Received: from mail-lj1-x243.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::243]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jOMoX-0006Qr-Kx for pgadmin-support@postgresql.org; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 14:45:29 +0000 Received: by mail-lj1-x243.google.com with SMTP id z26so11226ljz.11 for ; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 07:45:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=enterprisedb-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=dXxut/kr78dHCPoZT7aEdV8lUuECq2i5AMDegoTxmns=; b=FvYuazphZt8nE+himDDB+SjXqwUxa5SwdIbrNivyuQWxauu6Z+AveOHNPq8+uyQoEa FBK4rZ36V6s9keWKJRVsFWmEpdkDO652WVqbbM9ON1S+wd8AKKU2DexjRr70YKkfmWjV UShGF9kV+srqT1RXxW67gai28ziX/P2PBjgux5gJYgf7iIPM61617ynaqgghemQ/I8sE V/LkM3qSluOADzRUAG5gLUorLkXcSFlVjITlmStdLZHPg+A6yDMGweW0ZwWJK4pNu3Gk J1tBUNnbhuWiTeZN7VXGC+QalqzEJPcgXKScI9x9g5gkGfFhi4LzXUzomaE7bJQKyxw2 SNGQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=dXxut/kr78dHCPoZT7aEdV8lUuECq2i5AMDegoTxmns=; b=AaTzO11c8wUyhBf7UQ7ZbK/48T3cecIoAZDANbTUmuhdDh5cWUR6M9YWIBmqd+dtGN Vs3gtEWElNx3zRDuQF0xEGl+aTaiZ/ZsZF3RQHj72+PxjziBG3XfgoFQQpU/ZnGIMHPP Gemt66T6uTduPhLEm51m2whYeDSp9hxAegIuz8hH9Mb/VSRByJkEtZWNYWiqbko/MfAo QaIGYWAPiQqU9KEHAD8DvmZzO6tDO/sQXpN3Pl4GI32/uDhELx16qljOrMwZoD+YUXm1 dDMmBTd0dnTSaEW3nczOvZV3qseFs8UuiUFtHTQwwvJ+XRigxDmIjQWWUgZoGVC5e0kH nOcQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0Puahq/WBSqCGAnoox1JtuSk7mC9ITeSdl1MIPrhXCuNG+LTo0kEl c85ge9fR7maDUQwP5ASEFI8SLqNzsG3vqlNkfbgX0uBILBAJJuDe666bmQI+H4Yg5pOYUu4mQel 4khf+8WQy3jVHP3s0i8P82ZqSI7BLL50t+9ji6/J0vNofT5B7Q9jqi5RW3LosyxBHpzuQEmCoSh X1JjVNG1NUHheKDjeeetsr/aOp9mZIXlfqbtgTu3I82/ZqyGt2iEE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKhghl5i/FyQ3vjweK2DcwNM/vJ7+Gk1mw81GoRmJ3+Wyy7pniYupjpAjoGCbdt7aWXKs4SB+UIcZdEBjVnKHU= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b6cf:: with SMTP id m15mr324012ljo.168.1586875524637; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 07:45:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1e6b5a0b-2fc9-1cac-f13a-bcc84f02e00e@darrenduncan.net> <6148f1ed-8eee-931e-06a1-23c64d790cf5@darrenduncan.net> In-Reply-To: From: Neel Patel Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 20:15:12 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Proposal: Drop support for Internet Explorer To: Dave Page Cc: Khushboo Vashi , Darren Duncan , pgAdmin Support , pgadmin-hackers , Akshay Joshi Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f32f7a05a3413f9b" X-CLOUD-SEC-AV-Info: edb,google_mail,monitor X-CLOUD-SEC-AV-Sent: true X-Gm-Spam: 0 X-Gm-Phishy: 0 List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk --000000000000f32f7a05a3413f9b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Dave, Looks like patch is missing in attachment. Thanks, Neel Patel On Tue 14 Apr, 2020, 6:53 PM Dave Page, wrote: > Here's an updated patch that gives a slightly different message if the > browser is unknown vs. unsupported/deprecated. As with the previous patch, > the check can be disabled in the config. > > On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 5:07 AM Khushboo Vashi < > khushboo.vashi@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 11:57 PM Darren Duncan >> wrote: >> >>> The patch looks good as much as I understand it, but this raises an >>> important >>> question: >>> >>> How should one best handle minority browsers that may be completely >>> modern but >>> you may not specifically know about them? Such as the newer crop of >>> browsers >>> that emphasize stronger privacy or may have fewer identifiers? >>> >>> While going on a whitelist as the patch essentially does for known good >>> browsers >>> is conservative, I feel that an alteration would be good. >>> >>> I propose dividing the browsers/environments into 3 categories, which >>> are >>> recognized-supported, recognized-unsupported, and unrecognized. >>> >> >>> So the unsupported older versions of supported browsers get a stronger >>> message >>> encouraging a browser switch as they are recognized as unsupported, >>> while >>> unrecognized browsers get a different weaker message saying they weren't >>> recognized so we can't determine if they'd work; both can point to the >>> list of >>> known supported browsers. >>> >>> I do agree with this suggestion. >> >> >>> Related to this, there could be an application toggle that affects the >>> unrecognized category where users can basically say, yes I understand >>> you don't >>> recognize this browser, please hide the warning, or something like that. >>> >>> Also, it probably goes without saying, but the code/templates will need >>> to be >>> structured in such a way that the warning message uses about plain as >>> possible >>> HTML so that if the browser doesn't support displaying the UI in general >>> it can >>> at least display the message. >>> >>> -- Darren Duncan >>> >>> On 2020-04-09 4:36 a.m., Dave Page wrote: >>> > Hi >>> > >>> > On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 12:26 AM Darren Duncan wrote: >>> > >>> > If its hard to know how many people are actually using Internet >>> Explorer: >>> > >>> > You could make the next release of pgAdmin display a message >>> occasionally to >>> > users of Internet Explorer saying that Internet Explorer will no >>> longer be >>> > officially supported in a future version, and when that version >>> comes the >>> > message says now no longer supported. >>> > >>> > You can then see how many people contact you about this to express >>> concern. >>> > >>> > >>> > Good idea. I've hacked up a patch to warn users if they're using a >>> deprecated or >>> > unsupported browser. >>> > >>> > CCing Akshay for a review :-) >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Dave Page >>> > Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com >>> > Twitter: @pgsnake >>> > >>> > EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com >>> > The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >>> >>> >>> >>> > > -- > Dave Page > Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com > Twitter: @pgsnake > > EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com > The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company > --000000000000f32f7a05a3413f9b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Dave,=C2=A0=C2=A0

Looks like patch is missing in attachment.

Thanks,
Neel Patel<= /div>

On Tue 14 Apr, 202= 0, 6:53 PM Dave Page, <dpage@pgadmi= n.org> wrote:
Here's an updated patch that gives a slightly different message= if the browser is unknown vs. unsupported/deprecated. As with the previous= patch, the check can be disabled in the config.

On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 5:0= 7 AM Khushboo Vashi <khushboo.vashi@enterprisedb.com>= ; wrote:


On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 11:57 PM Darren Dunca= n <darren@darrenduncan.net> wrote:
The patch looks good as much as I underst= and it, but this raises an important
question:

How should one best handle minority browsers that may be completely modern = but
you may not specifically know about them?=C2=A0 Such as the newer crop of b= rowsers
that emphasize stronger privacy or may have fewer identifiers?

While going on a whitelist as the patch essentially does for known good bro= wsers
is conservative, I feel that an alteration would be good.

I propose dividing the browsers/environments into 3 categories, which are <= br> recognized-supported, recognized-unsupported, and unrecognized.

So the unsupported older versions of supported browsers get a stronger mess= age
encouraging a browser switch as they are recognized as unsupported, while <= br> unrecognized browsers get a different weaker message saying they weren'= t
recognized so we can't determine if they'd work; both can point to = the list of
known supported browsers.

I do agree with this suggestion.
=C2=A0
Related to this, there could be an application toggle that affects the
unrecognized category where users can basically say, yes I understand you d= on't
recognize this browser, please hide the warning, or something like that.
Also, it probably goes without saying, but the code/templates will need to = be
structured in such a way that the warning message uses about plain as possi= ble
HTML so that if the browser doesn't support displaying the UI in genera= l it can
at least display the message.

-- Darren Duncan

On 2020-04-09 4:36 a.m., Dave Page wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 12:26 AM Darren Duncan wrote:
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0If its hard to know how many people are actually us= ing Internet Explorer:
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0You could make the next release of pgAdmin display = a message occasionally to
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0users of Internet Explorer saying that Internet Exp= lorer will no longer be
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0officially supported in a future version, and when = that version comes the
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0message says now no longer supported.
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0You can then see how many people contact you about = this to express concern.
>
>
> Good idea. I've hacked up a patch to warn users if they're usi= ng a deprecated or
> unsupported browser.
>
> CCing Akshay for a review :-)
>
> --
> Dave Page
> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
> Twitter: @pgsnake
>
> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company





--
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake<= br>
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise= PostgreSQL Company
--000000000000f32f7a05a3413f9b--