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

fixed end date issue and issues scheduling pipelines in Firefox #2866

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 11, 2024

Conversation

rsun19
Copy link
Contributor

@rsun19 rsun19 commented May 30, 2024

Closes: RHOAIENG-1197

Description

The issue at hand was that in Firefox, when trying to schedule a pipeline run, returned incoherent values for the end date. This was because of the usage of the Date() constructor, which is inconsistent at runtime if the parameter isn't an ISO 8601 formatted string. Here is the documentation if you are interested.

Unfortunately, it seemed that I could not schedule any pipelines in Firefox, due to this runtime issue, which is a larger issue. Although this is now fixed, I need guidance on whether or not the testing I have done is adequate, or if it needs more.

Reproducible for Firefox on Mac

How Has This Been Tested?

Run npm run test.

Test Impact

I added a test for my newly created function in frontend/src/utilities/__tests__/time.spec.ts

Request review criteria:

Self checklist (all need to be checked):

  • The developer has manually tested the changes and verified that the changes work
  • Commits have been squashed into descriptive, self-contained units of work (e.g. 'WIP' and 'Implements feedback' style messages have been removed)
  • Testing instructions have been added in the PR body (for PRs involving changes that are not immediately obvious).
  • The developer has added tests or explained why testing cannot be added (unit or cypress tests for related changes)

After the PR is posted & before it merges:

  • The developer has tested their solution on a cluster by using the image produced by the PR to main

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from alexcreasy and ppadti May 30, 2024 21:39
@rsun19
Copy link
Contributor Author

rsun19 commented May 30, 2024

Need guidance on whether more testing is necessary or what I have is adequate.

Copy link

codecov bot commented May 30, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 78.67%. Comparing base (f72473b) to head (c65b901).
Report is 62 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2866      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   77.50%   78.67%   +1.17%     
==========================================
  Files        1110     1120      +10     
  Lines       23482    23767     +285     
  Branches     5917     5982      +65     
==========================================
+ Hits        18199    18698     +499     
+ Misses       5283     5069     -214     
Files Coverage Δ
...ateRun/contentSections/RunTypeSectionScheduled.tsx 83.33% <100.00%> (ø)
...oncepts/pipelines/content/createRun/submitUtils.ts 86.36% <ø> (-0.94%) ⬇️
.../src/concepts/pipelines/content/createRun/utils.ts 97.22% <100.00%> (ø)
frontend/src/utilities/time.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 154 files with indirect coverage changes


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update f72473b...c65b901. Read the comment docs.

@christianvogt
Copy link
Contributor

christianvogt commented May 31, 2024

After creating a scheduled run, from the table choose to Duplicate the run. If you then toggle the switch off and then on again the following error appears:
image

Perhaps patternfly has some insight for working with their dates: https://github.com/patternfly/patternfly-react/blob/main/packages/react-core/src/components/TimePicker/TimePickerUtils.tsx

@rsun19
Copy link
Contributor Author

rsun19 commented Jun 7, 2024

^ Code is ready for review

@christianvogt
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm
/approve

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 11, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: christianvogt

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 41922cd into opendatahub-io:main Jun 11, 2024
8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants