Skip to content

fix(progress_history): label axis dates on calendar days - #6574

Merged
adriadam10 merged 1 commit into
boykopovar:mainfrom
GalaxyGamingFR:fix/progress-history-calendar-labels
Oct 19, 2026
Merged

adriadam10 merged 1 commit into
boykopovar:mainfrom
GalaxyGamingFR:fix/progress-history-calendar-labels

Conversation

@GalaxyGamingFR

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What

chart() only drew an axis label and grid line at x positions that have a data point, and there is one point per day with commits. labelled() chooses Mondays for spans over 31 days (and the first Monday of each month past 150 days), so any chosen Monday without a commit lost its label. The current Pages chart (2026-08-03 to 2026-10-15) is missing the 08-10, 08-17 and 08-31 labels for that reason. The label loop now walks every calendar day from the first to the last point; px() already takes any day ordinal.

Tested

Windows 11, Python 3.12.10. New test_axis_labels_fall_on_calendar_days_without_commits (a 70-day series with three Mondays missing) fails on main ('>08-10<' not found) and passes with the fix. test_long_series_keeps_the_chart_readable still gets the same label counts. All tools/tests/test_*.py pass and python tools/check_conventions.py --base origin/main passes.

Checklist

  • Based on current main; no other open PR implements the same functions
  • One topic per PR; follow-ups go in a new PR
  • No comments in code except technical debt
  • Unimplemented paths throw (NotImplemented_nid_no_patch); silent stubs are listed under Silent stubs in their library's technical debt file
  • No notes, investigation .md files or images added to the repository (attach them to this PR)
  • New third-party code is a submodule built from source
  • Generic behaviour, not specific to one title
  • Depends on: none
  • Unblocks: none
  • GPUs tested: n/a
  • AI-assisted: yes

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Axis labels and grid lines were drawn only at data points, so a Monday
without a commit lost its label. The label loop now walks every calendar
day between the first and last point. A test covers a series that skips
several Mondays.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@MarcZX10

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I inspected the Windows relinker log for run 38807048211. The failure is in the unrelated build_eligibility test: test_author_with_a_commit_in_main_runs_the_relinker and test_author_with_only_merged_pull_requests_runs_the_relinker each hit the 20 s Node subprocess timeout. The macOS and Ubuntu relinker jobs pass, and the change is Python-only. This timeout is addressed by #6583, which reuses one Node process across the eligibility scenarios; it is still open, so rerunning after that lands should tell whether anything remains.

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Other open pull requests touch the same code. Merging one will break the other, or both implement the same thing. If this one builds on them, list them in Depends on.

Pull request Conflicting files (lines on main) Same exports Same new files
PR 6643 tools/progress_history.py L81-105

@adriadam10 adriadam10 self-assigned this Oct 19, 2026
@adriadam10
adriadam10 merged commit c4d6dbe into boykopovar:main Oct 19, 2026
17 of 18 checks passed
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.

3 participants