Skip to content

Conversation

@sbc100
Copy link
Collaborator

@sbc100 sbc100 commented Oct 24, 2025

This is pretty large, and complex feature that (as far as we can tell) had no users. See #25440 for more detail on the deprecation planning.

Fixes: #25440

@sbc100 sbc100 marked this pull request as draft October 24, 2025 23:48
@sbc100 sbc100 force-pushed the remove_proxy_to_worker branch from bc1dbc0 to 8f5870e Compare October 24, 2025 23:55
@sbc100 sbc100 force-pushed the remove_proxy_to_worker branch 4 times, most recently from 4c306df to af63385 Compare November 18, 2025 19:52
@sbc100 sbc100 marked this pull request as ready for review November 18, 2025 19:52
@sbc100 sbc100 requested review from dschuff, juj and kripken November 18, 2025 19:52
@sbc100 sbc100 force-pushed the remove_proxy_to_worker branch 3 times, most recently from 407336c to dc1f196 Compare November 18, 2025 20:01
@sbc100 sbc100 force-pushed the remove_proxy_to_worker branch from dc1f196 to 729685a Compare November 19, 2025 21:02
@sbc100 sbc100 requested a review from kripken November 19, 2025 23:28
@sbc100
Copy link
Collaborator Author

sbc100 commented Nov 20, 2025

No worries, didn't mean to try to shame you!

This is the first time I've following the my own new guidelines for feature deprecation/removal. I think it went pretty smoothly. I guess we will see if we get any reports form folks actually still using this.

@sbc100
Copy link
Collaborator Author

sbc100 commented Nov 20, 2025

Maybe I'll wait until tomorrow before landing this so @juj can have a chance to chime in. I think it should be find as we already discussed this in #25439

@sbc100 sbc100 force-pushed the remove_proxy_to_worker branch from 729685a to 16542d7 Compare November 20, 2025 04:45
@sbc100 sbc100 force-pushed the remove_proxy_to_worker branch from 16542d7 to a301168 Compare November 20, 2025 17:40
@sbc100 sbc100 enabled auto-merge (squash) November 20, 2025 17:40
- The `-sPROXY_TO_WORKER` setting (along with the corresponding
`--proxy-to-worker` flag) was removed due to lack of usage. If you were
depending on this feature but missed the PSA, please let us know about your
use case. (#25645, #25440)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
use case. (#25645, #25440)
use case. See also the PROXY_TO_PTHREAD and ENVIRONMENT=worker
options, which might be useful replacements. (#25645, #25440)

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe.. but they really are not direct replacements since you would need to do your own event proxying. Obviously we can keep adding more details to this changelog entry but really I think the github issues is the right place to go into more details.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fair enough.

@sbc100 sbc100 merged commit 4bf9bfa into emscripten-core:main Nov 20, 2025
34 checks passed
@sbc100 sbc100 deleted the remove_proxy_to_worker branch November 20, 2025 20:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Can we deprecate --proxy-to-worker / -sPROXY_TO_WORKER?

3 participants