-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
core(driver): remove unused goOffline/goOnline methods #12135
Conversation
#578 📆 ⏳ 😢 Maaaaaybe it's worth keeping? It does seem like the kind of thing custom gatherers might use...but I'm also 100% for deleting unused things, and that's winning out for me right now :) Also I've never loved that call hierarchy. |
@@ -7,14 +7,6 @@ | |||
|
|||
/** @typedef {import('../gather/driver.js')} Driver */ | |||
|
|||
const OFFLINE_METRICS = { | |||
offline: true, | |||
// values of 0 remove any active throttling. crbug.com/456324#c9 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this seems like the only tricky knowledge that could be lost if trying to recreate going offline at a later date, but based on that comment is it still true/useful today?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Based on the immediate followup commit, it looks like future attempts should be fine with just offline: true
.
If we ever need to find this again, we know the file to use git history on :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good, but I don't have any strong opinions on keeping some of these.
Let the record show that @paulirish +1'd this in person but did not use the 👍 reaction on any comment or PR description as of 2/25/2021 6:05pm CST despite claims to the contrary. :) |
i don't know what you're talkin about… ;) |
Summary
Removes some unused parts of driver I noticed while refactoring pieces for #11313. I don't recall if we ever established a semver policy for removing esoteric driver methods, but if there was a conversation I missed about this please feel free to correct me :)
Given how much of a delineation we made for non-public artifacts that are technically still accessible, this seems perfectly in line with that policy.
Related Issues/PRs
ref #11313