The stubbing of total works, but when I call it (in schema/partner_show.js) it doesn’t appear to return the promises I expect it to and the tests fail with null values.

Any idea what I’m doing wrong?

@dzucconi I’d really like some input on this one, currently its tests are failing.

:Taking a look:

k peep 8e34232
and
bf3e2ea

This change depends on https://github.com/artsy/gravity/pull/9992 being deployed.

In Eigen we called this ausstellungsdauer, but I’ve noticed that that was not something that was shared across clients, e.g. Force calls it ‘running dates’.

I went with the translation of ‘ausstellungsdauer’, but I’m open to a naming contest.

/cc @orta

'Exhibition period' makes more sense than 'running dates' IMO.

hah, just found this discussion - yeah, I think realistically exhibition period is a much better name.

Moment has some methods that might make some of this logic easier to read:

if (start.isSame(end, 'year')) { ... }

In general I've been shying away from including predetermined date formatting in the schema in favor of exposing a moment formatting interface directly. Though I can see this can't really be handled that way. I'd like to avoid the nonsense we have in Force though where there are many subtly different date string formatting methods on models.

In general I've been shying away from including predetermined date formatting in the schema

Yeah, I do get that, but we just keep re-implementing these things. So I’m thinking that maybe it’s time for that shift in moving view models into the ☁️ ?

I'd like to avoid the nonsense we have in Force though where there are many subtly different date string formatting methods on models.

I’m not familiar with the Force code-base, but did have a hard time figuring out all the date methods when doing some cursory reading for this work.

I agree that I’d also like to avoid that, so don’t hold back when reviewing!

Yah; I'm with it after thinking about it. I think historically this has been a problem because of a lack of consistency site-wide when designs have been specified but there's now a move to actually consolidate. See the image of the spec posted below. It'll be nice to not have to worry about it for sure.

@dzucconi I was unsure how to make numeral work with this field that takes an optional argument. Is this a requirement for getting this merged or is it something that can be added when needed?

Yeah it probably needs to be edited to accept that, but it's fine—you'll just have to process it to add commas or whatever else you wanna do on your client in the meantime.

@briansw FYI here are the test cases.

"Before this many days no update will be generated" doesn't make too much sense, perhaps "the maximum amount of days to show a relative day string, instead of the full time range"?