Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Change behavior of skipWaiting() #1019

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 2, 2016
Merged

Change behavior of skipWaiting() #1019

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 2, 2016

Conversation

jungkees
Copy link
Collaborator

@jungkees jungkees commented Dec 2, 2016

Before this, skipWaiting() promises when called multiple times on a
waiting worker had different behaviors among each other where the winner
waits unitl the Activate is complete while others don't. This makes the
behavior consistent by making the Activate be called only once. To
achieve that, this removes the steps in skipWaiting() that call the
Activate on a waiting worker (so promise resolves right away after
setting the skip waiting flag) and simplifies the call sites of the
Activate in the Install algorithm.

Related issue: #1015.

Before this, skipWaiting() promises when called multiple times on a
waiting worker had different behaviors among each other where the winner
waits unitl the Activate is complete while others don't. This makes the
behavior consistent by making the Activate be called only once. To
achieve that, this removes the steps in skipWaiting() that call the
Activate on a waiting worker (so promise resolves right away after
setting the skip waiting flag) and simplifies the call sites of the
Activate in the Install algorithm.

Related issue: #1015.
@jungkees
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jungkees commented Dec 2, 2016

/cc @asutherland

@jakearchibald
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM. Wow, this is so much easier with the simpler formatting 😄

@jungkees jungkees merged commit d84b93e into master Dec 2, 2016
@jungkees jungkees deleted the skipwaiting-fix branch December 2, 2016 11:23
@asutherland
Copy link

Yes, LGTM too! Thanks!

Also, total agreement with Jake on how awesome it is to be able to read the diffs easily! Three cheers for all involved in the transition to bikeshed!

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.

3 participants