Created three new celery tasks:
* save_sms (will replace send_sms)
* save_email (will replace send_email)
* save_letter (will replace persist_letter)
The difference between the new tasks and the tasks they are replacing is
that we no longer pass in the datetime as a parameter.
The code has been changed to use the new tasks, and the tests now run
against the new tasks too. The old tasks will need be removed in a separate
commit.
Comments are PR review. Updated code style in a few places to make it
more consistent with other code, added tests for letters and emails
so they are testedt, refactored some database queries to dao file
- Fixed code style
- Refactored database queries to dao code
- Added tests for emails and sms.
- Moved the process_incomplete_jobs to tasks.py
- Moved the process_incomplete_jobs test to test_tasks.py
- Cleaned up imports and other code style issues.
As the new tasks is not a scheduled one, moved the the tasks.py file.
This makes it more consisted with other tasks. Updated a few code style
issues to make it more consistent with other coe and hence more
maintainable in future.
- Added log for when a job starts so that we will know when the processing of a job starts with the number of notifications
- Added dao method to get total notifications for a job id
- Added a test to check whether the number of notifications in the table matches the job notification_count
this means that if the task is accidentally ran twice (eg we autoscale
notify-celery-worker-beat to 2), it won't send letters twice.
Additionally, update some function names and config variables to make
it clear that they are referring to letter jobs, rather than all letter
content
previously they were using sample_service fixture under the hood, but
with full permissions added - this works fine, **unless** there's
already a service with the name "sample service" in the database. This
can happen for two reasons:
* A previous test didn't tear down correctly
* This test already invoked the sample_service fixture somehow
If this happens, we just return the existing service, without modifying
its values - values that we might change in tests, such as
research mode or letters permissions.
In the future, we'll have to be vigilant! and aware! and careful! to
not use sample_service if we're doing tests involving letters, since
they create a service with a different name now
Removed the tests for trial mode service for the scheduled tasks and the process job.
Having the validation in the POST notification and create job endpoint is enough.
Updated the test_service_whitelist test because the order of the array is not gaurenteed.
If the service has not set the url then nothing happens.
If the request to the service url returns with 500 or greater the task is retries.
The task is created when the SMS provider post the inbound SMS.
- uses the reference field on the notifications table to store a 16char random string used to cross reference DVLA letters back to the notification
- used as letter barcode does not have space for a UUID notification id
Depends on https://github.com/alphagov/notifications-utils/pull/149
Renamed the numeric_id to notification_reference in utils and changed validation rules to match this
Note also the persist_notification method set "reference" to be "client_reference" which is confusing and they are different things, so fixed this too.
Problem: we were sending the first line of the address in the
`TO_NAME_2` field. This meant that they couldn’t do any PAF lookups with
it, because it wasn’t where they were expecting.
The first line of the address is the second line of what our users give
us. We need to give this to DVLA as the _third_ line of the address
output, which they call `TO_ADDRESS_LINE_1`.
Whatever a user has entered for their service’s contact block should
appear in the right place in the file we give to DVLA.
The work to output in the right fields in the DVLA file has already been
done. We just weren’t passing it through. This commit passes it through.
Extends the test to make sure that the thing that builds each line of
the file is getting called with the right template, personalisation and
numeric ID. Will be helpful the more complicated the call to the
template gets.
