Closed geeosh closed 4 years ago
It seems a good solution, why is it not merged/evaluated?
@packrat386 could we get this or #150 merged? Bumped into this bug today.
Hey y'all. As you can probably tell, this repo is in need of a bit of TLC and I haven't been able to spend all that much time on it. I'm planning to spend some time this weekend to go through outstanding pull requests that can be merged and then cutting a new version. I know it's been a while since there have been any updates, so thanks for your patience.
These changes have been pulled into 3.1.0
I kept having issues where (only on my CI), the
have_enqueued_sidekiq_job(..).at(...)
matcher would fail, because the timestamps didn't match. I discovered it was due to sub-second differences. By comparing all times with.to_i
it fixes it.I noticed there were already two pull requests open regarding this -- I agree with the implementation in #150, but it has merge conflicts, so I've posted this PR in case it is useful to be merge-ready.