Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 28, 2021. It is now read-only.

adds admin notification #106

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

adds admin notification #106

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions config.example.ini
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -40,6 +40,12 @@ enable=false
;;; Verschiedene Benachrichtigungsservices (So ziemlich alles was man sich vorstellen kann). Mehrere URIs durch Kommata trennen -> https://github.com/caronc/apprise
service_uris=discord://webhook_id/webhook_token,matrix://hostname

[ADMIN]
;;; Benachrichtigungsweg für Fehlermeldungen an den Admin:
;;; 'email', 'telegram', [...] oder 'none', wenn keine separaten Fehlermeldungen gesendet werden sollen
method=none
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@sibalzer my proposal to avoid a huge config.ini or cluttering the directory with a second config file

Copy link
Owner

@sibalzer sibalzer Jun 10, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

i still have to think about it. it would make sense to have three variables where you can specify either a mail address telegram id or apprise uri where a notification can be sent to. I would write this only in the documentation to not create confusion.

e.g.

[ADMIN]
notification_telegram_id=
notification_email_adress=
notification_aprrise_uri=

Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

btw i dont think we need a beta or dev branch anymore. with v3 this was still necessary because there were massive feature addings and i made big changes with settings.py in parallel. i just couldn't handle all the manual testing. but that changed and we have a ci pipeline with linting, unittesting and integration tests. we can be more agile now.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@paulypeter paulypeter Jun 10, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Your proposal looks great, I like it. I was also thinking about it, but apparently not far enough.

So do you want to merge new feature branches directly onto main now? I wasn't sure, but if you say it should be fine, we can do that of course. I think it's a choice of release frequency, isn't it? (i. e. release smaller updates more often v. bigger updates less frequently)

Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should approach it that way. But I don't have time at the moment (exams), so no pressure.

;;; falls Fehlermeldungen gesendet werden sollen: Hier die Config analog zur obigen einfügen

[ADVANCED]
;;; Wartezeit zwischen den Abfragen eine zu kleine Wartezeit führt (vermutlich) zu einem IP-Ban (Default: 1min, kann aber empirisch verkleinert werden)
cooldown_between_requests=60
Expand Down