| 17:31 | <shu> |
|
| 21:19 | <leobalter> | Is Daniel Minor (Mozilla) in this channel? I've seen the agenda item proposing demotion of ShadowRealms to Stage 2. I'd love if we can link that agenda item to an open (new?) thread in the ShadowRealms repo. Considering the facts, I'd have to agree with the arguments and recognize there's an amount of work for HTML integration I initially underestimated. Saying that, we have work with Igalia restarting on this in October 1st. This update is as fresh as today. The budget cut happened initially along the mass layoffs and we are putting it back to order to continue the work here. Even if the demotion is unavoidable, I'd love we can set a plan for the next steps for what would be expected for re-requesting Stage 3. Having a thread linked to this agenda item, we can have pre-discussions and champions might be able to draw some estimates as well. |
| 21:19 | <leobalter> | littledan shu caridy |
| 21:20 | <Kris Kowal> | dminor is here. |
| 21:20 | <leobalter> | Thank you, Kris Kowal ! I couldn't find it. For the ref: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1WJd9g3df_ibVHK3LdoKX2FboDwYQBUBJNxuRAWOYYbM/edit#slide=id.p |
| 21:24 | <shu> | i agree with dminor's points |
| 21:25 | <shu> | i think a demotion to stage 2 would be precisely to make the criteria for getting back to stage 3 clear |
| 21:25 | <shu> | (which is html integration) |
| 21:25 | <shu> | so any update Igalia or the champions want to provide on restarting that work would be towards the same goal IMO |
| 21:26 | <shu> | but the current state, as the slides say, is not implementable nor shippable |
| 21:26 | <shu> | also, recall Apple even had to unship because of a misunderstanding of what the HTML integration involved! |
| 21:28 | <leobalter> | I fully understand from your perspective. I just wish we had Michael Ficarra's mid-stage. While we don't have the new stage, hopefully we can agree to settle the current ES-specs as a like-stage-3 quality/stable. Of course this would still be subject to new changes for anything new identified in the HTML integration. Is that agreedable? |
| 21:29 | <shu> | yes, i think it'd be good to reaffirm consensus that the 262 spec is fine as-is |
| 21:29 | <ljharb> | we've done that twice now, with import assertions and something else |
| 21:29 | <shu> | and that there are no further plans to redesign |
| 21:30 | <ljharb> | demotion to stage 2, with a consensus about what items are expected to make it re-eligible for stage 3 consensus (implying that other items aren't in scope) |
| 21:31 | <leobalter> | I'd propose we keep the proposed ES-spec as is, being the next steps HTML integration with tests. With the above complete, we reconsider it eligible for Stage 3, formal consensus still needed. |
| 21:31 | <shu> | that sgtm. not sure if dminor had more in mind |
| 21:37 | <Kris Kowal> | dminor stated Mozilla’s position (from last week’s SES meeting, recording forthcoming) is that they cannot ship without HTML integration fully specified and they are not particular about how the proposal gets staged. It could remain at stage 3 and HTML integration could be a follow-up. |
| 21:38 | <Kris Kowal> | They’re also amenable to backing up to Stage 2. I think Leo’s proposal fits in that range. |
| 21:39 | <shu> | ah i think mine is a little stronger, i would prefer demotion to stage 2 over remaining at stage 3 in the holding pattern waiting on HTML integration |
| 21:39 | <leobalter> | This works for me, I haven't discussed this with the other champions yet, but it seems pretty reasonable. Let me summarize the (pre) agreements I'm proposing:
I'm doubling down on tests here as I want to make sure it's shippable, a bit more than the formal requirements for Stage 3. |
| 21:39 | <Kris Kowal> | That is dminor’s understanding of your position as well, shu |
| 21:40 | <leobalter> | I'm not sure I'll be able to attend the TC39 meeting, so registering this here in the lack of an open thread. |
| 21:42 | <leobalter> | the summary I proposed is in case the demotion to Stage 2 happens. I don't see a better alternative for that right now so it feels like my best option. |
| 21:55 | <Kris Kowal> | Mozilla’s position https://youtu.be/xbrsdwNVYKQ?t=87 |
| 23:13 | <dminor> | Just to be clear, our position is that we should either demote to Stage 2, or remove the HTML integration from the proposal entirely and keep it at Stage 3. We're not ok with keeping this at Stage 3 as it stands. |
| 23:14 | <dminor> | And V8's position as I understand it, is that removing the HTML integration is not a good idea for the web, so I think that leaves demotion to Stage 2. |
| 23:14 | <dminor> | But I'm happy for the details to be worked out in plenary. |
| 23:37 | <shu> | oh man, cutting it super close with the iterator helpers thing |
| 23:37 | <shu> | we were like minutes away from pressing the kill switch button before the GH thread was updated that the upstream fix was rolled out |
| 23:42 | <littledan> | This all sounds reasonable to me. I don’t think anyone is pushing for changes outside of the HTML integration, and our last couple demotions and repromotions gave me confidence that we as a committee can keep promises to ourselves. I am very glad that this is resuming with Igalia next month. |
| 23:43 | <littledan> | I don’t think mficcarra’s extra stage has anything to do with this. I would basically hope for html integration to be in place to get to the new, earlier stage (though, sure, maybe it is only a fully hard requirement at Stage 3) |