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

chore(eventhandler): include options object in event handler #289

Conversation

esatterwhite
Copy link

Includes a common options object to be passed into the event handler constructor and propogated through its factory function.

This makes adding additional customer properties and configration easier to manage between the various repos and minimizes the need to explicitly expose option in every project

Includes a common options object to be passed into the event handler
constructor and propogated through its factory function.

This makes adding additional customer properties and configration easier
to manage between the various repos and minimizes the need to explicitly
expose option in every project
alewitt2
alewitt2 previously approved these changes Oct 20, 2022
Copy link
Member

@alewitt2 alewitt2 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@esatterwhite
Copy link
Author

Is there a way to re-trigger this build?

@alewitt2
Copy link
Member

alewitt2 commented Nov 2, 2022

i think you just have to push an empty commit

git commit --allow-empty -m "Trigger Build"

@esatterwhite
Copy link
Author

@alewitt2 done

Looks like there may be a change to the LIBC version on node18 that
travis isn't ready for
.travis.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Alex Lewitt <48691328+alewitt2@users.noreply.github.com>
@esatterwhite
Copy link
Author

@alewitt2 Seems like the DOCKERHUB_TOKEN environment variable isn't set correctly or is missing from travis

@alewitt2
Copy link
Member

alewitt2 commented Nov 3, 2022

hmm thats very odd. @carrolp or @kdai7 can you take a look? maybe it needs to build from branch and not fork?

@alewitt2
Copy link
Member

alewitt2 commented Nov 3, 2022

#291

@alewitt2 alewitt2 closed this Nov 3, 2022
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