HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
WICG
webpackage
Go2017–2026
WICG / webpackage

webpackage

Web packaging format

32Distinct people
53Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
1.3KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Web packaging format

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 11:19:25 AM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year53 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2017-07-13 03:26:41 UTC to 2026-02-15 19:43:26 UTC.

051015202017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 2 submissions, 1 comments20172018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 20 mentions; 4 submissions, 16 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 2 submissions, 4 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 10 mentions; 1 submissions, 9 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 0 submissions, 6 comments20212022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 4 mentions; 0 submissions, 4 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments. Incomplete calendar period.2026*

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC321
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC20416
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC624
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC1019
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC606
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC404
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
2026 (partial)2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

From the project README

An excerpt from the repository, fetched Nov 13, 2026.

Read the project’s introduction
Packaging Websites Not to be confused with webpack, this repository holds a collection of specifications aimed at packaging websites. These specifications replace the W3C TAG's Web Packaging Draft and will allow people to bundle together the resources that make up a website, so they can be shared offline, either with or without a proof that they came from the original website. A full list of use cases and resulting requirements is available in draft-yasskin-wpack-use-cases (IETF draft). Explainers Use cases Maintaining security and privacy constraints Specifications Building this repository Building the Draft Packaging tools Signed HTTP Exchanges Web Bundles Isolated Web Apps (signing with integrity block) Explainers The explainers walk through how to use these specs to achieve the use cases. Use cases Packaging whole pages or sites: can be signed or unsigned. Serving signed subresources of a signed top-level HTML page Navigating to top-level unsigned pages Packaging subresources. This can include groups of JS modules, stylesheets, images, or fonts. This is also getting fleshed out at https://github.com/littledan/resource-bundles/ Maintaining security and privacy constraints How to avoid third-party tracking What origin does an unsigned bundle have? Specifications The specifications come in several layers: Signed HTTP exchanges (a.k.a. SXG) (IETF draft): These allow a browser to trust that a single HTTP request/response pair was generated by the origin it claims. As we implement and test signed exchanges, we're publishing periodic snapshots so that browsers, publishers, and intermediates can synchronize on the same format. The current implementation snapshot is an Internet Draft, and a draft of the next snapshot is in this repository. Web Bundles (previously called Bundled HTTP exchanges): A collection of HTTP resources, each of which could be signed or unsigned, with some metadata describing how to interpret the bundle as a whole. This specification has an initial draft in a PR, but isn't finished yet. This work may proceed through either the IETF or the W3C/WHATWG. Update: This work was moved to the wpack-wg/bundled-responses repository (Web Bundles (IETF draft)) . Loading: A description of how browsers load signed exchanges. This is initially specified here, and will eventually merge into the appropriate specs, e.g. Fetch, that live in either the W3C or WHATWG. Currently this only covers signed exchanges. Subresource Loading (Explainer): A description of how browsers load a large number of resources efficiently with Web Bundles. This is initially specified here, and will eventually merge into the appropriate specs. A previous draft of the format combined layers 1 and 2 into a single format for signed packages: draft-yasskin-dispatch-web-packaging (IETF draft). The DISPATCH WG at IETF99 recommended the current split. Building this repository Building the Draft Formatted text and HTML versions of the draft can be built using make. $ make This requires that you have software installed as described in https://github.com/martinthomson/i-d-template/blob/main/doc/SETUP.md. Packaging tools Signed HTTP Exchanges Install this with go install github.com/WICG/webpackage/go/signedexchange/cmd/... (Golang 1.18+). See go/signedexchange for the usage of the tool. Web Bundles There are several tools. Go (Reference Implementation) Install this with go install github.com/WICG/webpackage/go/bundle/cmd/.... See go/bundle for the usage of the tool. Node There is a npm package, wbn. Plugin for bundlers (Experimental) Rollup plugin Webpack plugin Rust (Experimental) google/webbundle Isolated Web Apps (signing with integrity block) Go (Reference Implementation) See go/bundle#using-integrity-block-sub-command for more. Node There is a npm package, wbn-sign. Also same plugins as for Web Bundles can sign the bundles.
Read the full README on GitHub

What Hacker News says

4 sources
There's signed & bundled http requests that, I think, will do much of this job better in the long run. It also helps accelerate the everyday web browsing experience/page load speed. Webpackage. I really like the idea of being able to take a webpage I've downloaded & hand it to my friend. Retransmissable webapps. If the app is offline capable, theycll have the full experience, then & there. Memento's earlier & very interesting, great effort. I still think webpackage/web bundles is more likely to gain traction & to manifest into what we want. https://github.com/WICG/webpackage
In About the Memento Project
With certificate transparency, I dont think SXG's expiration is a real barrier to broader use. The hardnosed shitty browser attitude around right now: it will collapse in the face of obvious utility, other people will implememt more aspirational & liberal systems. This stance is untennable in the face of the obvious huge value of being able to look at old signed content, particularly when coupled with certificate transparency systems. This conservative standard will is just a minimal & obvious agreeable starting place, something to appease the rejectionist low-caliber safari-alike attitudes, but adoption will give way to expansion, given the immense user value of signed content. I say this as a core core protester against these pathetic loserly expiration timeouts[1]. I get maybe not putting all your chips in SXG basket. I disagree with a
Read the rest
bunch of the protest: this seems like a sensible, basic, obvious layered enhancement to the existing web. Safari & Mozia are (as is the mood today) being terrible shits as usual, the regressives. Contrasting ADX versus SXG just feels so wild, because SXG is a small refinememt to a vast world spanning & complete ecosystem of technology that has already taken over the planet. It directly targets the one complaint you make: http-server centricity, & sets dynamite to that one old bad no-good base. And ADX is an standalone completely isolated alternate world, it's own reality. This tension, whether we need a baseline which is 100% new & novel & redefines the entire problem space on it's own terms, completely from scratch, or whether we can hack & improve & enhance what we have: I dont feel like there's any camp at all left to defend improvememt. Ideally SXG would be used woth additional user-encryption. User subdomains, eith their own keys would be swell. Turning sites into sites of sites is what SXG really starts to permit. Layering in some .well-known to be more cryptographically portable with identities ks just another small enhancement, just more layering, albeit yet-more-idealism. Tear it all down, start over... it's the mode. I agree, this debate needs more than HM comments. But this tension & conflict, this view of the world & how it evolves or revolts: it's been trying to make revutions & insist no bounds, nothing today can possibly be good enough for tomorrow. And two plus decades latter, it's made such tiny impact, is so niche. I accept your snub, getting told im exasperated, but it's for a real reason, it's because these decades have failed to deliver & so few have willingly tried improving what is (Safari & Mozia being a quite vocal modern anchor keeling things in place, a modern astrpturfing shouting class against trying anything, especially). This effort does have the social capital to perhaps emerge & birth something new, but we could also just improve & greatly fix everything that ready is. With minor, layered, small, principled enhancements. [1] https://github.com/WICG/webpackage/issues/597
In Bluesky – Authenticated Data EXperiment

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.