-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
feat: use DateTime abstraction from apalis-sql
#30
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
feat: use DateTime abstraction from apalis-sql
#30
Conversation
DateTime abstraction from apalis-sql
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
|
@Himmelschmidt Did you run tests locally? I think you are basing your HEAD an old version and need to rebase |
I have run the tests and aside from the doctest there were no failures. I didn't fix it before, figured it might be out of scope, fixed it now. But I don't think that's what you were talking about |
But the previous doctests passed, what changed? |
|
Wasn't there a new If you'd like, i can delete this one and start fresh from HEAD to get a clean commit history |
|
I think it should be ok, but it’s important to watch out for regressions.
Maybe just stash your changes then pull the latest, then pop those changes
and push.
…On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 at 19:18, Himmelschmidt ***@***.***> wrote:
*Himmelschmidt* left a comment (apalis-dev/apalis-sqlite#30)
<#30 (comment)>
I didn't fix it before, figured it might be out of scope, fixed it now.
But the previous doctests passed, what changed?
Wasn't there a new TaskBuilderExt added? I believe it was added in rc1
and when I started this PR, the apalis deps were still pointing at beta 1
(iirc).
If you'd like, i can delete this one and start fresh from HEAD to get a
clean commit history
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#30 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AWXVRGXGBNUVKX3MS4U26RL4FZ7O3AVCNFSM6AAAAACQCH5OV6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZTOMRUGYZDGMJWHA>
.
You are receiving this because your review was requested.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
Regarding signing commits, I think you need to rebase all of the commits.
Or squash them into one signed commit.
On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 at 22:13, Geoffrey Mureithi ***@***.***>
wrote:
… I think it should be ok, but it’s important to watch out for regressions.
Maybe just stash your changes then pull the latest, then pop those changes
and push.
On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 at 19:18, Himmelschmidt ***@***.***>
wrote:
> *Himmelschmidt* left a comment (apalis-dev/apalis-sqlite#30)
> <#30 (comment)>
>
> I didn't fix it before, figured it might be out of scope, fixed it now.
>
> But the previous doctests passed, what changed?
>
> Wasn't there a new TaskBuilderExt added? I believe it was added in rc1
> and when I started this PR, the apalis deps were still pointing at beta 1
> (iirc).
>
> If you'd like, i can delete this one and start fresh from HEAD to get a
> clean commit history
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#30 (comment)>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AWXVRGXGBNUVKX3MS4U26RL4FZ7O3AVCNFSM6AAAAACQCH5OV6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZTOMRUGYZDGMJWHA>
> .
> You are receiving this because your review was requested.Message ID:
> ***@***.***>
>
|
Replace direct chrono dependency with DateTime/DateTimeExt from apalis-sql, enabling support for both chrono and time datetime libraries via feature flags. Changes: - Add `chrono` (default) and `time` feature flags - Use DateTimeExt::from_unix_timestamp instead of chrono::Utc.timestamp_opt - Update apalis dependencies to 0.7.0-rc.2 - Move chrono to dev-dependencies (only needed for tests/examples) Related: apalis-dev/apalis#655
962de03 to
2ecb4ce
Compare
Use
DateTimeandDateTimeExtfrom apalis-sql instead of direct chrono dependency.Adds
chronoandtimefeature flags for datetime library selection.Related: apalis-dev/apalis#655