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

Respect configured timezone in rails apps #131

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Feb 4, 2016

Conversation

Projects
None yet
5 participants
@effektz
Contributor

effektz commented Apr 5, 2015

This change will make sidekiq respect the set timezone inside of rails apps by using Time.current instead of Time.now

@coveralls

This comment has been minimized.

coveralls commented Apr 5, 2015

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 93.27% when pulling 914a54e on effektz:master into 3d78df3 on tobiassvn:master.

1 similar comment
@coveralls

This comment has been minimized.

coveralls commented Apr 5, 2015

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 93.27% when pulling 914a54e on effektz:master into 3d78df3 on tobiassvn:master.

@dholdren

This comment has been minimized.

dholdren commented Jun 8, 2015

👍 I'm running into this issue as well.

@dholdren

This comment has been minimized.

dholdren commented Jun 8, 2015

I wonder if config.utc should then default to true?
I'm sure a lot of people's servers run on UTC time, and therefore config.utc being true or false makes no difference now, but with this change their workers will then run at times relative to their configured timezone.

@vayu-technology

This comment has been minimized.

vayu-technology commented Jul 19, 2015

Any chance that this can be merged in? Seems like a pretty good addition!

endofunky added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 4, 2016

Merge pull request #131 from effektz/master
Respect configured timezone in rails apps

@endofunky endofunky merged commit dbb6c85 into endofunky:master Feb 4, 2016

2 checks passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
coverage/coveralls Coverage remained the same at 93.27%
Details
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment