Classic!

But before you judge the fix too hashly, I bet it’s just a quick and easy fix that will suffice while a proper fix (to avoid depending on external state) is written.

▲

pavel_lishin 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I'll bet you one US Dollar that this is a scenario where the temporary fix becomes the permanent one. (Well, at least, permanent for a hundred years.)

Some day, Pham Nuwen is going to be bitching about this test suite between a pair of star systems.

	▲	db48x 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That’s one of my favorite books :) I agree that it’s plausible!

▲

em-bee 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

of course it is just an easy fix. it's the kind of solution that even someone like me could write who has no understanding of the code a all. (i am not trying to imply that the submitter of the PR doesn't understand the code, just that understanding it is unlikely to be necessary, thus the change bears no risk.

but, the solution now hides the problem. if i wanted to get someone to solve the problem i'd set the new date in the near future until someone gets annoyed enough to fix it for real.

and i have to ask, why is this a hardcoded date at all? why not "now plus one week"?

	▲	db48x 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		There’s a lot to be said for simplicity. The more logic you put into handling the dates correctly in the tests, the more likely you are to mess up the tests themselves. These tests were easy to write, easy to review, easy to verify, and served perfectly well for 10 years. But doing it right shouldn’t be all that hard.