Skip to content
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

fix: multiple retro meeting fixes #10918

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

iamhks
Copy link
Contributor

@iamhks iamhks commented Feb 22, 2025

Description

Fixes #9748 #10111 #10113

The Retro series card now shows the upcoming meeting name instead of the retro series name.
Also, the creation of recurrent meeting where the date was not being taken as per the selected day of the week is fixed and this also flows to the meetings which are recurrent/series as the name of the card. Updated the code to save the same in backend.

Demo

Adding screenshots.
Screenshot 2025-02-22 at 21 53 21
Screenshot 2025-02-22 at 21 53 35

Please let me know if things are not clear, will add a loom video.

Final checklist

  • I checked the code review guidelines
  • I have added Metrics Representative as reviewer(s) if my PR invovles metrics/data/analytics related changes
  • I have performed a self-review of my code, the same way I'd do it for any other team member
  • I have tested all cases I listed in the testing scenarios and I haven't found any issues or regressions
  • Whenever I took a non-obvious choice I added a comment explaining why I did it this way
  • I added the label Skip Maintainer Review Indicating the PR only requires reviewer review and can be merged right after it's approved if the PR introduces only minor changes, does not contain any architectural changes or does not introduce any new patterns and I think one review is sufficient'
  • PR title is human readable and could be used in changelog

@github-actions github-actions bot requested a review from Dschoordsch February 22, 2025 16:27
Copy link
Contributor

@Dschoordsch Dschoordsch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think there is some clarification necessary as we cannot just name the current meeting with the next starting day as that's the time when we will end it and start the next one, see also #10111 (comment)

That needs some clarification first. Feel free to separate this part from the rest, so we can move forward with it. Or you can wait till it's clarified.


useEffect(() => {
if (recurrenceDays.length > 0) {
const nextDate = getNextMeetingDate(recurrenceDays, recurrenceStartTime);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

-1 We should make use of the RRule package here. We can do something like const nextMeetingDate = rrule.after(now).

useEffect(() => {
if (recurrenceDays.length > 0) {
const nextDate = getNextMeetingDate(recurrenceDays, recurrenceStartTime);
setRecurrenceStartTime(nextDate);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

-1 I think what you're trying here might work. However we call this from RecurrenceTimePicker below which would not trigger this effect. It would also call the state setting function twice. I think we would need to have a separate callback to the picker instead.

Comment on lines +50 to +57
const startTime=new Date(
rrule!.dtstart.year,
rrule!.dtstart.month - 1,
rrule!.dtstart.day,
rrule!.dtstart.hour,
rrule!.dtstart.minute,
rrule!.dtstart.second
);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

-1 With your current changes in the client, this should just be rrule.after(new Date()).
startTeamPrompt needs the same treatment.

Actually, if we start the meeting now, then it will be closed on startTime and a new meeting opened. So this is wrong and new Date() was correct.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actually, if we start the meeting now, then it will be closed on startTime and a new meeting opened. So this is wrong and new Date() was correct.

But in the createMeetingSeriesTitle mutation if you pass the new Date() instead of startTime then you'll never have a recurrent meeting that begins with the date that user opted for right? It'll always be today.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No, the next meeting in the series will be started at startTime and will get a new createMeetingSeriesTitle with the startTime.
There is no complete clarity how we can solve this issue, so it's not ideal to be picked up by you. We need to do some UI/UX work first.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sure then, I'll work on something else. Converting this to draft, will reopen with updated PR once we have some clarity.

@iamhks iamhks marked this pull request as draft March 4, 2025 10:26
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.

Retro meeting series instances have wrong name
2 participants