Re: [slightlyoff/ServiceWorker] More clarity around waiting for an active worker to finish (#916)

I think I like that. You're right, the pseudo-state was the annoying part to implement around.

The one worry implementation-wise is to ensure closing the last document doesn't end up with stalled fetch events: they should either terminate or finish normally, so that activation can proceed in a timely manner.

Also, a constant stream of events could delay activation indefinitely, even with skipWaiting (e.g., lots of XHR or postMessage), but we could have a fixed timeout to escape that.

@jakearchibald @jungkees WDYT? 


---
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/slightlyoff/ServiceWorker/issues/916#issuecomment-226938404