http://test/OCL:225615635:BASE:225615669:1544830702389:633455ba

This PR requires internal refactoring which I submitted as http://cl/225629766. The submission of this PR is blocked until that change is approved and submitted.

Need also bump the rxjs peerDependency version from ^6.0.0 to ^6.1.0.

oh. shoot. I thought we bumped the rxjs version to v6.1 in v7, but obviously we haven't.

that means that this Pr needs to wait even longer until we open master for 8.x development.

Should I bump the version as part of this PR, or is that something done separately?

@ChrisDahmCS That's done separately.

This should be unblocked now by #30032

All (the pull request submitter and all commit authors) CLAs are signed, but one or more commits were authored or co-authored by someone other than the pull request submitter.

We need to confirm that all authors are ok with their commits being contributed to this project. Please have them confirm that by leaving a comment that contains only @googlebot I consent. in this pull request.

Note to project maintainer: There may be cases where the author cannot leave a comment, or the comment is not properly detected as consent. In those cases, you can manually confirm consent of the commit author(s), and set the cla label to yes (if enabled on your project).

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

Hi @ChrisDahmCS - could you rebase this PR or check the "Allow edits by maintainers" box so that we can perform the rebase ourselves and push to your branch?

Hey @atscott! I do have the "allow edits by maintainers" option selected. It looks like there were updates from another maintainer as well, I don't know if this affects.

Hey @atscott! I do have the "allow edits by maintainers" option selected. It looks like there were updates from another maintainer as well, I don't know if this affects.

Ah, indeed that's right. When I tried to push up my local rebased branch, I forgot it was named differently than your remote so the push was rejected.

As described here #39643 (comment), it is not possible, nor favourable, to land this change. The RxJS isObservable() requires that the object contains not only a subscribe() method but also a lift() method. I guess this is what distinguishes an Observable from a Subscribable, which is what our EventEmitter really is. Moreover, bringing in the RxJS isObservable() actually increased the distributable size, so it is actually better to keep our own implementation.

This issue has been automatically locked due to inactivity.
Please file a new issue if you are encountering a similar or related problem.

Read more about our automatic conversation locking policy.

_{This action has been performed automatically by a bot.}