Plumb activation state into parallel steps

[mreichhoff]

TODO: activation consumption still TBD.

[mreichhoff]

@domfarolino @johannhof

this should address the other feedback in the prior round, other than the goal of consuming user activation in the event that the promise is rejected (which I wanted to ask about, since the only other spec I've found with such a pattern is SAA, which I believe has the same parallelism issue).

[domfarolino]

LGTM. Do you also want to consume activation in the event that you don't reject the promise? I imagine that it should be consumed regardless, no?

[mreichhoff]

I imagine that it should be consumed regardless, no?

There was a long discussion about this on the SAA side, and I believe it's still pending on some kind of temporary consumption mechanism. It might be reasonable to consume regardless, though, given the comparative ease of getting activation in this case (vs embedded content). I wonder if @johannhof has any thoughts.

[johannhof]

I think I somewhat prefer sticking to the SAA model of consumption for now. It seems like the most ergonomic model for developers and an okay compromise until we get around to figuring out the "pausing" model (which, admittedly, could take a while).

[mreichhoff]

that seems fair...I can leave the consumption as-is (i.e., in the rejection case only) and file an issue to revisit the concern about consuming activation in parallel steps once the temporary consumption mechanism is ready.