500 error on https://flathub.org/apps/dev.lizardbyte.app.Sunshine

[ReenigneArcher]

Sorry if this is the wrong place to post this issue, but I am seeing a 500 error on the site.

I noticed some issues after merging flathub/dev.lizardbyte.app.Sunshine#185

9 hours after the merge, I noticed the website had not updated yet, but the API did update as I could get the flathub version with shields.io.

At that time I also saw that a review was required because we updated the description; however that was already approved. The website was still up then, just still showing the last version's metadata.

[barthalion]

Fetching data for app details: dev.lizardbyte.app.Sunshine en
No eol rebase data
Fetching apps for developer LizardByte
Developer apps for LizardByte fetched
Addons for dev.lizardbyte.app.Sunshine fetched
RangeError: Invalid time value
at <unknown> (.next/server/chunks/9359.js:1:721)
at l (.next/server/chunks/9359.js:1:2701)
at f (.next/server/pages/apps/[appId].js:11:7094)
⨯ RangeError: Invalid time value
at <unknown> (.next/server/chunks/9359.js:1:721)
at l (.next/server/chunks/9359.js:1:2701)
at f (.next/server/pages/apps/[appId].js:11:7094)
⨯ RangeError: Invalid time value
at <unknown> (.next/server/chunks/9359.js:1:721)
at l (.next/server/chunks/9359.js:1:2701)
at f (.next/server/pages/apps/[appId].js:11:7094)

any ideas @razzeee?

[razzeee]

release has no timestamp, just date https://github.com/flathub/dev.lizardbyte.app.Sunshine/blob/master/dev.lizardbyte.app.Sunshine.metainfo.xml#L39

Need to dig, if we really don't use one to fill the other

[barthalion]

I think it's been traditionally timestamp. Maybe date is newish in the spec

[razzeee]

It should start showing up after #4534 but without that date value.

I think we should the backend take date and write it into timestamp, if that doesn't exist.

[bbhtt]

Timestamp is not supposed to be in metainfo, it is generated by appstream from date in catalogue. The bug here is that the release tags are mis-formatted, the indentation of the tags matters. release must be inside releases

[razzeee]

release must be inside releases

That's the case, but I guess you mean the indentation is causing this to break? I'm surprised the linter/appstream isn't failing on that then.

[bbhtt]

That's the case

Not in metainfo, appstream is supposed to catch it

[bbhtt]

I'll add a check for timestamp, this is the first time this has happened, everything else in catalogue has timestamp.

[bbhtt]

You should fix the release tag indentations because next time build is going to fail.

[ReenigneArcher]

Thank you for taking care of this, I'm fixing it upstream as well.

One more question (I can open a separate issue/request if needed).

Would it be possible accept a <pre> tag? We have some some commands to help users who might not read the official documentation.

It looks a lot nicer like this, but the linter currently doesn't allow it.

[bbhtt]

pre is not valid, appstream allows only a subset of tags. Use code.

[bbhtt]

although note that website won't show a code block for that tag like above.

[ReenigneArcher]

I see it adds a backtic before and after

[razzeee]

although note that website won't show a code block for that tag like above.

it should do that, do you have examples of that? are we talking about the description?

[bbhtt]

no I meant it's not a codeblock like in the picture, i know it adds backticks + slight highlight.

[ReenigneArcher]

I just modified the live page. It looks like this with <code>

(Still better than using <p>.)

[bbhtt]

Yes that's how it is supposed look.

[ReenigneArcher]

Looks like the linter fails for that too: https://github.com/LizardByte/Sunshine/actions/runs/12950999512/job/36125076386#step:15:88

[bbhtt]

It's going to fail if you have date set to date="1970-01-01" don't do that, and code should be inside p tag https://docs.flathub.org/docs/for-app-authors/metainfo-guidelines/#description

[bbhtt]

Ok I saw you are replacing it with awk, can you show the final metainfo after these adjustments are made? Something is wrong with it.

[razzeee]

According to https://tailwindcss-typography.vercel.app/ that backtick handling should only happen, when we use code inside of a header

[ReenigneArcher]

It's going to fail if you have date set to date="1970-01-01"

It's only like this for the PRs and unpublished versions, as I feel like configuring this through CMake is going to cause headaches. It gets replaced when we publish.

To clarify, you want a timestamp like an epoch timestamp instead of a date? The documenation shows a date, so I'm not clear on that new timestamp lint error. https://docs.flathub.org/docs/for-app-authors/metainfo-guidelines/#release

code should be inside p

Got it.

Ok I saw you are replacing it with awk, can you show the final metainfo after these adjustments are made? Something is wrong with it.

The release section is updated using awk when we publish the release, not during PRs.

[bbhtt]

To clarify, you want a timestamp like an epoch timestamp instead of a date? The documenation shows a date, so I'm not clear on that new timestamp lint error.

You only need to add date in Metainfo release tag, provided the format is correct and the date is in valid ranges appstream will convert it to timestamp automatically. It won't do that if you are using unix epochs.

You can't add timestamp in metinfo that will be another validation failure.

[ReenigneArcher]

Solved, thank you!