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

Use datetime.now instead of utznow #1983

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

tisnik
Copy link
Contributor

@tisnik tisnik commented Dec 2, 2024

Description

Use datetime.now instead of utznow

Python datetime objects can be naive or timezone-aware. While an aware
object represents a specific moment in time, a naive object does not
contain enough information to unambiguously locate itself relative to other
datetime objects. Since this can lead to errors, it is recommended to
always use timezone-aware objects.

Type of change

  • Refactor
  • New feature
  • Bug fix
  • CVE fix
  • Optimization
  • Documentation Update
  • Configuration Update
  • Bump-up dependent library
  • Bump-up library or tool used for development (does not change the final image)
  • CI configuration change
  • Konflux configuration change

Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 2, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from tisnik. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

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

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Dec 2, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 74.78%. Comparing base (e1ae8a7) to head (981b85f).
Report is 33 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1983       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   96.95%   74.78%   -22.17%     
===========================================
  Files          69       68        -1     
  Lines        2886     2883        -3     
===========================================
- Hits         2798     2156      -642     
- Misses         88      727      +639     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
ols/app/endpoints/feedback.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 35 files with indirect coverage changes

Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 2, 2024

@tisnik: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/unit 981b85f link true /test unit

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@onmete
Copy link
Contributor

onmete commented Dec 3, 2024

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 3, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants