Re: [w3c/ServiceWorker] The promises returned by skipWaiting() should have more consistent activation-waiting behavior and not call Activate() multiple times (#1015)

>  Currently step 24 of Install's "Wait until... registration's waiting worker's skip waiting flag is set." phrasing may cover this now?

Yes, I think the case is covered here, but we still need to change the step 25 where Activate is invoked only when "waitingWorker’s skip waiting flag is not set". This condition has been there to avoid redundant calls to Activate as, with the current text, `skipWaiting()` should have invoked Activate already as well. (Related issue: https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/issues/594.)

I think we now agree on the expected behavior. I'd like to have @jakearchibald's input before changing this though since he initially spec'd this part. (Just want to confirm what the original intention was and we're not missing any important bits.)

@wanderview, also your feedback about Activate job idea would be helpful. If the implementation is just good without that change, I don't think I want to change it for now. The scenario I'm concerned about is Activate is entered and executed as waiting worker is not null, and while it's executing a queued Unregister job is scheduled, run and reaches Clear Registration interleaved with Activate.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/issues/1015#issuecomment-263446172