This seems to be where this decision originated:
We’d want to address the underlying issues that @darius raised in that ticket and confirm that this is the right fix.
A middle ground might be to do something like:
- If the dateActivated of the revising order = the dateActivated of the order being revised, then set the dateCompleted to the dateActivated without subtracting 1 second.
or
- If subtracting 1 second from the dateCompleted will result in a dateCompleted < dateActivated, then set the dateCompleted = dateActivated.
Bigger picture I tend to agree that we shouldn’t be doing this in the first place, and should rather change all of the relevant code to assume that dateStopped is exclusive and dateActivated is inclusive, but there are likely broader backwards-compatibility considerations at this point we’d need to consider.
Thoughts? (also if @darius remembers and is lurking, please feel free to chime in :))