Re: [w3c/ServiceWorker] skipWaiting() promise should resolve after promotion to .active (#1187)

Ah I see, I also discovered #1015 too

I guess we'll implemented as spec'd but it's pretty weird. An implementation that always resolves the promise immediately wouldn't be super wrong, it can plausibly claim that the active version just happened to be handling an event at the exact moment you called skipWaiting().

If we were to design it over, would we give skipWaiting a promise? Is there any use case for using the promise? I'm wondering if developers are using the promise expecting it to mean something it doesn't.


-- 
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/1187#issuecomment-323646106