Add getTimeout methods to the SDKs

[mishushakov]

• Adds the ability to retrieve the current timeout of the sandbox via SDK (pre-requisite for events)

[changeset-bot]

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 059348a

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

[0div]

Same comments about js-sdk apply to python-sdk.

[0div]

some assertions around the time left after a waiting for a period of time with reasonable margins could be insightful here?

[mishushakov]

my test pass

[0div]

i meant assert that some of the expected time arithmetic is ball park what we would expect, ie setTimeout(1000ms) <=> endAt == now() + ~1000ms

[mlejva]

@mishushakov Please add sections/pages to docs so people know this method exists and how it can be used

[ValentaTomas]

I was checking RFC about adding sandbox state getter (https://github.com/e2b-dev/RFCs/pull/6/files) and I think these are related—maybe the state should be part of the info?

It is possible that we can add the state later, but I would like to have a high-level agreement on where these things should be.

[mishushakov]

State can be a part of the info, I agree, but maybe we don't need getInfo as it might be too opaque (what info?) and instead getState() and getEndDate() / getTimeout()

[ValentaTomas]

Yes, I think having the state, endDate, etc., separated is better here.
We can keep the discussion about state in the RFC and focus on how the endData/timeout should look like here.