Design Review #338

#338: scheduler.postTask() API

Visit on Github.

Opened Jan 24, 2019

こんにちはTAG！

I'm requesting a TAG review of:

Name: Scheduling APIs
Specification URL: no spec yet
Meta Explainer: https://github.com/spanicker/main-thread-scheduling/blob/master/README.md
postTask Explainer: https://github.com/WICG/main-thread-scheduling/blob/master/PrioritizedPostTask.md
Tests: not yet
Primary contacts: spanicker, szager-chromium

Further details (optional):

Relevant time constraints or deadlines: no time constraints. Seeking early feedback on the larger direction.
I have read and filled out the Self-Review Questionnare on Security and Privacy. The assessment is here.
I have reviewed the TAG's API Design Principles

You should also know that... This is a very early proposal and we are seeking broad feedback.

We'd prefer the TAG provide feedback as (please select one):

open issues in our Github repo for each point of feedback
open a single issue in our Github repo for the entire review
leave review feedback as a comment in this issue and @-notify [github usernames]

Discussions

2020-01-13

Minutes

Sangwhan: Not much to say on this one.

David: We commented on this at our f2fs last year.

Sangwhan: What is the shipping status?

Alice: In development.

Tess: Do we need time to generate more feedback?

Sangwhan: Seems premature to close this... but if we're not going to provide any useful feedback, we might as well.

David: Looks like the explainer might have been updated... not clear how experimental this is and at what point we are going to expect a spec which would allow interoperability. We would want a spec by the time we're shipping, and I'm not sure where this is on that path.

... Worth taking another look.

Alice: Bumped out to week of 3 February.

2020-02-10

Minutes

(out of time

2020-02-10

Minutes

Tess: Only had David from the assignees in Breakout A... still only have David.

2020-02-10

Minutes

(reading issue)

David: comment 10 days ago suggests API has changed quite a bit, we should probably take another look

Tess: needs new assignees, new milestone?

David: 3 assignees may be enough, we just need to take another look

Tess: look again in this afternoon's Calif-APAC call

2020-02-17

Minutes

David: there was brief followup in breakout C about this -- and it's now split into a bunch of separate issues.

Kenneth: I think the thing we discussed was having multiple APIs in one issue -- I think they filed the isInputPending review. We were confused about priority and what to look at first.

David: @shaseley asked to have this cover postTask, so perhaps we should do that?

Peter: yes

Kenneth: Should also fix explainer link

2020-02-17

Minutes

Dan: reviews status of issue

Dan: feels like we need to re-review it with the new design

Sangwhan: pick this up at the f2f?

Dan: new proposal here: https://github.com/WICG/main-thread-scheduling/blob/master/PrioritizedPostTask.md

Ken: this is one of 3 proposals in the issue. Maybe this should be split into 3 reviews?

Dan: Maybe their priorities are changing?

Hadley: they do have separate explainers for each...

Dan: I will bump this to the f2f and Ken can you please leave a note in the issue asking them what their current priorities are and how we can be most useful