Skip to content

RHCLOUD-29047 | feature: implement email sending settings#103

Draft
MikelAlejoBR wants to merge 2 commits into
RedHatInsights:masterfrom
MikelAlejoBR:RHCLOUD-29047-implement-email-sending-settings
Draft

RHCLOUD-29047 | feature: implement email sending settings#103
MikelAlejoBR wants to merge 2 commits into
RedHatInsights:masterfrom
MikelAlejoBR:RHCLOUD-29047-implement-email-sending-settings

Conversation

@MikelAlejoBR
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The back office proxy supports skipping the user resolution and overriding the email's sender and the email's default recipients, and the idea of these changes is for MBOP to support the same things too.

Jira ticket

[RHCLOUD-29047]

@MikelAlejoBR MikelAlejoBR force-pushed the RHCLOUD-29047-implement-email-sending-settings branch 2 times, most recently from 78e4954 to 1b3021c Compare November 13, 2023 16:24
@MikelAlejoBR
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/retest

6 similar comments
@MikelAlejoBR
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/retest

@MikelAlejoBR
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/retest

@MikelAlejoBR
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/retest

@lpichler
Copy link
Copy Markdown

/retest

@MikelAlejoBR
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/retest

@dagbay-rh
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

/retest

@dagbay-rh dagbay-rh self-requested a review December 7, 2023 18:42
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@dagbay-rh dagbay-rh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

all the new logic looks good to me! only thing I am wondering about: are there tests we can add/update to cover the new logic in send_email.go? im not very familiar with mbop so apologies not knowing the tests setup

@dagbay-rh
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

the pr build is failing due to:
12:50:20 requests.exceptions.HTTPError: 400 Client Error: Bad Request for url: https://ee-xhhvb4rb-auth.apps.c-rh-c-eph.8p0c.p1.openshiftapps.com/auth/realms/redhat-external/protocol/openid-connect/token

seems related to bonfire stuffs happening. our unit tests are passing so I think this should be ok to ignore for now. not totally sure who would know more about these builds tho, would be nice to see if we can get them passing or fix them etc

@MikelAlejoBR
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

all the new logic looks good to me! only thing I am wondering about: are there tests we can add/update to cover the new logic in send_email.go? im not very familiar with mbop so apologies not knowing the tests setup

I really have no idea. Maybe I can try to build a mock for the SendEmails function?

@gwenneg
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

gwenneg commented Mar 22, 2024

Hi everyone! Any chance this could be merged soon?

@MikelAlejoBR
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Hello,

I need to take a look at those tests and implement them. I'll get to it.

The back office proxy supoports skipping the user resolution and
overriding the email's sender and the email's default recipients, and
the idea of these changes is for MBOP to support the same things too.

RHCLOUD-29047
@MikelAlejoBR MikelAlejoBR force-pushed the RHCLOUD-29047-implement-email-sending-settings branch 2 times, most recently from c8f5b8a to a45349c Compare March 25, 2024 15:42
@MikelAlejoBR
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

I've added a few tests as requested @dagbay-rh

@MikelAlejoBR MikelAlejoBR force-pushed the RHCLOUD-29047-implement-email-sending-settings branch 3 times, most recently from 8168e13 to bf71a33 Compare March 25, 2024 16:41
@MikelAlejoBR MikelAlejoBR force-pushed the RHCLOUD-29047-implement-email-sending-settings branch from bf71a33 to fd8e70c Compare March 25, 2024 16:44
@MikelAlejoBR
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/retest

2 similar comments
@MikelAlejoBR
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/retest

@abaiken
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

abaiken commented Apr 9, 2024

/retest

@abaiken
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

abaiken commented Apr 9, 2024

I am fine with merging this 👍 The logic looks good to me! I think the last PR we merged was also failing the PR check so i do not think its related to your PR.

@gwenneg
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

gwenneg commented Apr 10, 2024

Let's make sure this PR won't create any issues in the special environment before it is merged.

Until then...

image

cc @MikelAlejoBR

@MikelAlejoBR MikelAlejoBR marked this pull request as draft April 10, 2024 13:58
@MikelAlejoBR
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@MikelAlejoBR test it in ephemeral

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.

5 participants