Reserve bounty improvements #5066
Conversation
vince0656
requested review from
danlipert,
octavioamu and
thelostone-mc
as code owners
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #5066 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 31.03% 31.02% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 218 218
Lines 17515 17533 +18
Branches 2404 2409 +5
==========================================
+ Hits 5436 5440 +4
- Misses 11856 11870 +14
Partials 223 223
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #5066 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 30.71% 30.78% +0.07%
==========================================
Files 221 221
Lines 17870 17941 +71
Branches 2469 2491 +22
==========================================
+ Hits 5489 5524 +35
- Misses 12155 12187 +32
- Partials 226 230 +4
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
@vince0656 nice ! mind opening a draft PR going forward so that it's extra clear that the PR is not ready for review ? |
vince0656
changed the title
Sure! I've updated the title. Is that sufficient or is there anything else I need to do to make it clear it's a draft PR? |
|
@vince0656 Hey Vincent - when you create a new PR, theres an option to create it as a normal PR, or a draft PR. The difference is that it doesn't ping us for reviews until you set it ready for review if its a draft PR 👍 |
vince0656
force-pushed
the
reserve-bounty-improvements
branch
from
e4dc0e8 to
10a45ff
Compare
|
sweet looks like we making progress ^_^ |
vince0656
force-pushed
the
reserve-bounty-improvements
branch
2 times, most recently
from
5cd20ca to
5c2f1ef
Compare
vince0656
changed the title
|
@danlipert @thelostone-mc @PixelantDesign All good to go 👍 |
| delta = self.reserved_for_user_expiration - self.reserved_for_user_from | ||
| days = delta.days | ||
|
|
||
| if days > 0: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a simpler way we can humanize the timedelta? https://anandnalya.com/2009/05/humanizing-the-time-difference-in-django/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey Dan. I'm not sure what you mean? I've had a look at the link you sent and we would still need to do calcs for hours. Additionally, the humanised timedelta outputs seem different compared to the current requirement of allowing a funder to reserve for '3 days', '1 week' or 'Keep reserved'. I tried to make the code as scalable as possible and struggled to find easier ways of doing this. It's a shame the timedelta object doesn't have an hours getter attribute or even a weeks one which is strange as you can construct a timedelta with weeks, days, hours, minutes etc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@danlipert any thoughts on my comment?
|
I’m excited too! Any thoughts @danlipert? |
|
@octavioamu Will fix the build issues when I get a chance |
vince0656
force-pushed
the
reserve-bounty-improvements
branch
from
685a66c to
35c5141
Compare
|
@octavioamu @thelostone-mc All good to go 👍 |
octavioamu
dismissed stale reviews from thelostone-mc and themself
via
d5d79d2
thelostone-mc
dismissed stale reviews from danlipert, octavioamu, and themself
via
08252d2
thelostone-mc
force-pushed
the
reserve-bounty-improvements
branch
from
cd37a16 to
08252d2
Compare
Description
Inprovements to the reserve bounty functionality including a new 'reserved' state for bounties so that they don't show up on the issue explorer when users are searching for 'open' bounties
Refers/Fixes
#3544
Testing
Appropriate unit tests have been added
Video demonstration
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1-WZrPWReWAC2h6-u54FmU7phD9GX9iCA