Skip to content

Fix issue with timezone awareness#57

Merged
safaricd merged 2 commits intomainfrom
PRI-193
Jan 13, 2026
Merged

Fix issue with timezone awareness#57
safaricd merged 2 commits intomainfrom
PRI-193

Conversation

@safaricd
Copy link
Collaborator

@safaricd safaricd commented Jan 13, 2026

Change Description

This fixes an issue where we were trying to compare UTC-aware and unaware timestamps, reported by some of the users. This particular part of the code only gets triggered in the extensions.

Importantly - this PR also contains an unrelated change; namely the runtime_environment attribute that we attach to each base event.

@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello @safaricd, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request resolves a critical bug related to timestamp comparisons within the system's extensions. By standardizing the timezone awareness of dates before comparison, it prevents erroneous calculations that could arise from mixing timezone-aware and unaware datetime objects. The change ensures the reliability of time-based logic in the affected components.

Highlights

  • Timezone Awareness Fix: Addressed an issue where timezone-aware and unaware timestamps were being compared, leading to incorrect calculations. Specifically, the install_date is now explicitly made UTC-aware if it lacks timezone information.
  • Impacted Component: This fix is applied to a part of the code that is exclusively triggered within the extensions, ensuring correct behavior in those specific scenarios.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request correctly addresses an issue with comparing timezone-aware and naive datetime objects for the install_date. The change ensures install_date is timezone-aware before comparison, preventing a TypeError. However, my review found that this fix is incomplete. The same potential error exists for other datetime properties loaded from the application state, such as last_prompted_at and last_pinged_at, which are also compared with timezone-aware datetimes. I've left a comment with more details and recommend applying the fix consistently to all relevant datetime properties to fully resolve the issue.

@safaricd safaricd merged commit 0e2fc0b into main Jan 13, 2026
9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants