Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

amelioration(email): passe les jobs non prioritaire [appelons ça des bulk email], dans la queue de low_priority #9617

Conversation

mfo
Copy link
Contributor

@mfo mfo commented Oct 18, 2023

ajoute une var d'env BULK_EMAIL_QUEUE = 'low_priority' dans notre cas.

@mfo mfo force-pushed the US/move_low_priority_email_in_low_priority_queue branch 4 times, most recently from b6abe51 to bd606bb Compare October 18, 2023 05:16
Copy link
Member

@colinux colinux left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Quelques retours nommage, sinon ça me paraît super sur le principe

app/jobs/custom_delivery_job.rb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
app/jobs/custom_delivery_job.rb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
app/jobs/custom_delivery_job.rb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@mfo mfo force-pushed the US/move_low_priority_email_in_low_priority_queue branch 4 times, most recently from e6271d0 to 6368fb6 Compare October 18, 2023 13:33
@mfo mfo force-pushed the US/move_low_priority_email_in_low_priority_queue branch from 6368fb6 to b69d4ba Compare October 18, 2023 15:08
@mfo mfo requested a review from colinux October 18, 2023 15:37
@mfo mfo added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 19, 2023
Merged via the queue into demarches-simplifiees:main with commit 5ad724a Oct 19, 2023
15 checks passed
@mfo mfo deleted the US/move_low_priority_email_in_low_priority_queue branch October 19, 2023 03:38
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.

2 participants