Draft: Relax timestamp timezone validation for startDate and endDate fields on NWB file formats

[aaronkanzer]

Relates to dandi/dandi-archive#1944

and changes made for NWB in NeurodataWithoutBorders/pynwb#1886

Observed in failed dandiset validation in staging environment here: https://gui-staging.dandiarchive.org/dandiset/213840

Cc @candleindark @yarikoptic @satra @bendichter

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 91.59%. Comparing base (e135307) to head (40d8fb5).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #242      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   87.42%   91.59%   +4.17%     
==========================================
  Files          16       16              
  Lines        1726     1726              
==========================================
+ Hits         1509     1581      +72     
+ Misses        217      145      -72     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	91.59% <100.00%> (+4.17%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[satra]

@aaronkanzer - i'm not sure this is necessary. i believe pydantic default validator for datetime works fine. at least on the example ben sent.

[aaronkanzer]

@aaronkanzer - i'm not sure this is necessary. i believe pydantic default validator for datetime works fine. at least on the example ben sent.

Hmmm, agreed -- accordingly to the docs it should work fine (e.g. pydantic handling different formats of datetime), but it is still failing 🤔

Perhaps a different root cause....looking further...

[bendichter]

Yes, this is what has been confusing us. We don't see any logic in the dandi schema that would seem to require timezones for this field

[aaronkanzer]

Closed for now -- as it doesn't seem that this is the root cause error of validation for certain datetime timestamps.