On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com> wrote:

> Edward O'Connor wrote:
>
>> Perhaps TC39 should consider adopting a similar policy.
>>
>
> Policy, schmolicy :-P.
>
> (Presumably clocks with deadlines are required; consensus could break
> afterwards, in spite of the formal rules.)
>
> Let's let our hair down a bit and get real here. We did not "declare
> consensus" Thursday last week, in any formal or informal fashion. We knew
> Andreas wasn't there. We heard his position articulated by Sam (who dialed
> in). We knew most of what we now know.
>
> At this point we must forge async consensus. Is Andreas and anyone else
> (I'm not singling him out; I sympathize and started on his/Sam's/Kevin's
> "side" earlier last week) objecting doing so in a consensus-breaking way,
> for sure? We should async-check this.
>
> Often one objects or finds a survivable fault in a consensus position, and
> works to persuade others to overcome it. Sometimes this leads to
> minimization (and over-minimization) and deferment of troublesome but
> important bits (@medikoo on twitter reminds me we dropped .done after
> June's big thread -- a semi-consensus deferment, I found from (re-)reading
> a bunch of messages).
>
> If we really have broken consensus in the async sense, we will have to
> back up to Kevin's fixup of AP2, as Mark suggests. I have no idea how this
> will shake out.
>
> I'd rather we keep separate and conflict-prone APIs in separate objects,
> though. I'd rather we acknowledge that Promises are a library de-facto
> quasi-standard we are trying to codify, not green-field work where we can
> start over or "do both".
>

Excited to hear someone else recognize this reality.


> Is any of this persuasive to anyone? Dunno, you tell me. If DOM only
> wanted .then/.resolve, you should join my "realist" camp :-P.
>
> /be
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20140205/a468e302/attachment.html>

On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com> wrote:

> I'd rather we keep separate and conflict-prone APIs in separate objects,
> though. I'd rather we acknowledge that Promises are a library de-facto
> quasi-standard we are trying to codify, not green-field work where we can
> start over or "do both".
>

Excited to hear someone else recognize this reality.