Start date explicit timezone to UTC for all files#210
Closed
mikaelarguedas wants to merge 3 commits intoros2:masterfrom
Closed
Start date explicit timezone to UTC for all files#210mikaelarguedas wants to merge 3 commits intoros2:masterfrom
mikaelarguedas wants to merge 3 commits intoros2:masterfrom
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
This reverts commit fb80485. Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
mikaelarguedas
force-pushed
the
start-date-explicit-timezone
branch
from
4946465 to
897b112
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #210 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 77.95% 77.98% +0.03%
==========================================
Files 16 16
Lines 576 577 +1
Branches 52 52
==========================================
+ Hits 449 450 +1
Misses 107 107
Partials 20 20
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
mikaelarguedas
commented
May 7, 2020
| extension = x509.BasicConstraints(ca=False, path_length=None) | ||
|
|
||
| utcnow = datetime.datetime.utcnow() | ||
| utcnow = datetime.datetime.now(datetime.timezone.utc) |
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note: the changes to the certificates (so here and in test_create_key.py) have no effect as the datetime used by python cryptography are considered naive and UTC. I added the UTC awareness just for consistency and in case cryptography supports timezones in the future
Member
|
Yeah assuming this solves the issue I like this approach a lot better. |
Contributor
|
Tests failed on mini1 :(
I've been manually testing on Output from one of the failing tests And the <validity>^M
<not_before>2020-05-07T15:58:26+00:00</not_before>^M
<not_after>2030-05-05T15:58:26+00:00</not_after>^M
</validity>^M |
Member
Author
|
no way! that's a shame :( Well then I suggest to put this on standby and merge #209 to fix the nightlies |
This was referenced May 7, 2020
Member
Author
|
CLosing as not fixing the issue. Issue now tracked at #211 |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
Less hacky atlernative to #209
@sloretz I don't know how to test this, could you please give this a round of CI to see if it works with ros2/ci#436 ?
One linux test at https://ci.ros2.org/job/ci_linux/10646, (actually not a useful test because ros2/system_tests#415 is far behind master)