feat: Separate out past-opportunities feature #696
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
So that it may be opted out of if no past data is available (esp. if using random mode)
nickevansuk
approved these changes
Oct 15, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
So that it may be opted out of if no past data is available (esp. if using random mode)
This was prompted by Bookteq (and I've seen it for other users too), whose random modes are not capable of producing opportunities in the past.
There is a
not-implementedtest to ensure that there are no such opportunities if this feature is turned off.Even still, it is advisable to keep this feature on if at all possible. Even if a booking system cannot generate opportunities in the past in test suite conditions, it may be able to have opportunities expire but remain in the feed outside of test suite conditions. This is a compromise to help accelerate adoption but it may be worth considering if it should be kept as required