Conversation
alannnc
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Working fine and also with slots.
leog
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Tested a bunch of availability and time zones, as well as different event types courtesy of our pro user. Tests passed too.
@hariombalhara What's your system time zone? |
|
IST |
| `04:15:00.000Z`, | ||
| `05:00:00.000Z`, | ||
| `05:45:00.000Z`, | ||
| `06:30:00.000Z`, | ||
| `07:15:00.000Z`, | ||
| `08:00:00.000Z`, | ||
| `08:45:00.000Z`, | ||
| `09:30:00.000Z`, | ||
| `10:15:00.000Z`, | ||
| `11:00:00.000Z`, | ||
| `11:45:00.000Z`, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the reason for this time shift by 30mins? Was it a bug?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So we used to block out the slots for the duration of the slots - so if there was a 10m meeting at 4:15 and the event length was 45m - the next open slot would be 5:00. We've now changed this, so it will open up the nearest :15 - so 4:30 will open up again instead of 5:00.
|
this has two approvals. should I merge? We can do a follow up PR for NITs |
hariombalhara
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM !! Let's finish those double bookings



Would like 3 approvals before merge 🙏
What does this PR do?
Rewrites slot/availability logic by using date ranges. It simplifies the code, it was really tricky to make fixes in the old logic. It also fixes the issue that date overrides in different timezones didn't adjust, resulting in the organizer being booked outside their availability. All existing tests are passing + added new tests for the new logic
How should it be tested?
yarn testFixes that date overrides were not adjusted to different timezones:
Fixes #8666
Fixes #8374
Fixes #8329
Fixes #8000
Fixes #7687
Fixes #7114