Fix lock expiration and seconds remaining when lock passes 24 hours old #1
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
RobCombs
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 13, 2012
Fix lock expiration and seconds remaining when lock passes 24 hours old. Thanks for looking into this! I haven't had a chance to test it but if I notice any issues, I'll let you know.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
datetime.timedelta() normalizes times to days and seconds within a day. For example, if a time delta is 86401 seconds, then td.seconds is 1. The way to get absolute seconds is to mutliply td.days by seconds in a day, and then add in seconds. In python 2.7, there is a timedelta.total_seconds() call that does this math for you.
Because is_locked and lock_seconds_remaining only looked at the seconds, they behave strangely around day barriers.
I've tested this change against the 0.3 codebase, which we're using, but not 1.0. The tests should work, (and some fail without the change), but someone should try it.