Skip to content
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

Handles header-based directFromSellerSignals. #774

Merged
merged 36 commits into from
Oct 13, 2023
Merged

Conversation

qingxinwu
Copy link
Collaborator

@qingxinwu qingxinwu commented Aug 31, 2023

Resolves auction config's directFromSellerSignalsHeaderAdSlot promise.
Passes directFromSellerSignals to worklets (generateBid(), scoreAd(),
reportWin(), reportResult()).


Preview | Diff

Qingxin Wu added 2 commits August 30, 2023 23:10
Resolves auction config's directFromSellerSignalsHeaderAdSlot promise.
Passes directFromSellerSignals to worklets (generateBid(), scoreAd(),
reportWin(), reportResult()).
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@qingxinwu qingxinwu added the spec Relates to the spec label Aug 31, 2023
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@caraitto caraitto left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks Qingxin for helping out with this!

I took a quick look and left some comments. By the way, how do you think we should integrate our 2 PRs?

@qingxinwu
Copy link
Collaborator Author

qingxinwu commented Aug 31, 2023

Thanks Qingxin for helping out with this!

I took a quick look and left some comments. By the way, how do you think we should integrate our 2 PRs?

Thanks Caleb. I'll fix those errors you pointed out.
About integrating the PRs, I only need the two struct definitions that I put in a todo block to remind myself to remove. So unless it's required to put them in a single PR, I think you can submit your PR with that TODO about my work, and I'll merge mine afterwards.

spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@qingxinwu
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@domfarolino Mind taking a look? Thanks.

@qingxinwu
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Thanks Qingxin for helping out with this!
I took a quick look and left some comments. By the way, how do you think we should integrate our 2 PRs?

Thanks Caleb. I'll fix those errors you pointed out. About integrating the PRs, I only need the two struct definitions that I put in a todo block to remind myself to remove. So unless it's required to put them in a single PR, I think you can submit your PR with that TODO about my work, and I'll merge mine afterwards.

Done. @caraitto Feel free to take another look. Thanks!

spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@caraitto caraitto left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Still LGTM, good catches Dominic. Qingxin, please wait for Dominic's approval.

spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@domfarolino domfarolino left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just about done I think!

spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@caraitto caraitto left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Still LGTM.

spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@domfarolino domfarolino left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM % #774 (comment).

Thanks for the patience with all the review churn, I hope it was helpful.

@qingxinwu
Copy link
Collaborator Author

LGTM % #774 (comment).

Thanks for the patience with all the review churn, I hope it was helpful.

Thanks so much for all the through reviews. That's super helpful! I'll address that, and link to the correct definitions once the other PR is merged.

@JensenPaul JensenPaul merged commit ffc0e8d into WICG:main Oct 13, 2023
2 checks passed
github-actions bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 13, 2023
SHA: ffc0e8d
Reason: push, by JensenPaul

Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
caraitto added a commit to caraitto/turtledove that referenced this pull request Oct 13, 2023
WICG#774 landed, and this is done.
caraitto added a commit to caraitto/turtledove that referenced this pull request Oct 13, 2023
These default to null, not undefined, if not specified (or if there was an error loading).

Practically, I this this only matters for perBuyerSignals (since the other fields get set from string or null fields), but it's probably good to be consistent. 

This is related to this thread from the review: WICG#774 (comment)
@qingxinwu qingxinwu deleted the direct branch October 16, 2023 17:29
@qingxinwu qingxinwu mentioned this pull request Oct 16, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
spec Relates to the spec
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants