| 03:55 | <Domenic> | Thinking about a blanket policy of deleting "I want to work on this issue, please assign it to me" for whatwg/html at least... |
| 03:56 | <Domenic> | Not sure what's going on but there's probably something in the ecosystem that's incentivizing number of assigned issues. |
| 06:23 | <annevk> | Yeah I'm afraid that "good first issue" is more of a spam vector at this point than actually helping. :-( |
| 06:24 | <annevk> | E.g., https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/issues/1567 |
| 07:57 | <annevk> | Domenic: did you want to look at https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/38080 before I land it? |
| 07:57 | <annevk> | Or Adam Rice maybe? |
| 08:17 | <annevk> | Jake Archibald: did you ever put your thoughts about not passing methods that currently take a single argument to methods that will end up invoking it with multiple in an article? |
| 08:18 | <annevk> | Jake Archibald: I wanted to add arguments to URLSearchParams's has() and delete(), but the pushback is that such code might break... |
| 09:02 | <Domenic> | Domenic: did you want to look at https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/38080 before I land it? |
| 09:05 | <annevk> | Domenic: nice! We're taking a short break next week as well |
| 09:07 | <annevk> | Domenic: also thanks for the validation error review, I'll give it another pass. The status quo is such that each instance of "validation error" has its own code, but maybe that's indeed not needed. I had independently found another case where it seemed a bit superfluous. |
| 09:07 | <Domenic> | Yeah, not sure how perfect we need it to be before merging, but I thought I'd do a pass |
| 09:37 | <Jake Archibald> | annevk: I did! https://jakearchibald.com/2021/function-callback-risks/. Those URLSearchParams changes feel less likely to break since they need to be called with a URLSearchParams as this |
| 09:38 | <Jake Archibald> | annevk: I guess the pattern to watch out for would be params.has.bind(params) |
| 10:04 | <annevk> | Jake Archibald: thanks! |