Made "record sent automation email" code more consistent#29399
Merged
troyciesco merged 2 commits intoJul 20, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (6)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (4)
WalkthroughThe Suggested reviewers: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
|
| Command | Status | Duration | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
nx run ghost:test:ci:integration |
✅ Succeeded | 2m 12s | View ↗ |
nx run ghost:test:integration |
✅ Succeeded | 2m 42s | View ↗ |
nx run ghost:test:legacy |
✅ Succeeded | 3m 8s | View ↗ |
nx run ghost:test:e2e |
✅ Succeeded | 2m 30s | View ↗ |
nx run @tryghost/admin:build |
✅ Succeeded | 5s | View ↗ |
nx run-many -t test:unit -p ghost |
✅ Succeeded | 4s | View ↗ |
nx run ghost-monorepo:lint:boundaries |
✅ Succeeded | <1s | View ↗ |
nx run-many -t lint -p ghost,ghost-monorepo |
✅ Succeeded | 1s | View ↗ |
nx run-many --target=build --projects=tag:publi... |
✅ Succeeded | <1s | View ↗ |
💡 Verify your cache is correct by running tasks in a sandbox. Read docs ↗
☁️ Nx Cloud last updated this comment at 2026-07-20 18:51:28 UTC
EvanHahn
commented
Jul 16, 2026
| return await knex.transaction(trx => retryStep(trx, step, retryAt)); | ||
| }, | ||
|
|
||
| async recordEmailSent(options): Promise<void> { |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here's a diff showing what actually changed:
@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
-await knex.transaction(async (transacting: Knex.Transaction) => {
- await AutomatedEmailRecipient.add({
+await knex.transaction(async (trx) => {
+ const now = toDatabaseDate(new Date());
+ await trx("automated_email_recipients").insert({
+ id: ObjectId().toHexString(),
member_id: options.memberId,
member_uuid: options.memberUuid,
member_email: options.memberEmail,
@@ -9,12 +11,14 @@
? { mailgun_message_id: options.mailgunMessageId }
: {}),
track_opens: options.trackOpens,
- }, { transacting });
+ created_at: now,
+ updated_at: now,
+ });
- await transacting("automation_action_revisions")
+ await trx("automation_action_revisions")
.where("id", options.automationActionRevisionId)
.update({
- email_sent_count: transacting.raw("COALESCE(??, 0) + ?", [
+ email_sent_count: trx.raw("COALESCE(??, 0) + ?", [
"email_sent_count",
1,
]),| }); | ||
|
|
||
| describe('recordEmailSent', function () { | ||
| it('records the recipient and increments the action revision count', async function () { |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here's a diff showing what actually changed in this test:
-it("records the recipient and increments the action revision count in one transaction", async function () {
- const emailSentCountExpression = Symbol("email_sent_count_expression");
- const updateRevision = sinon.stub().resolves();
- const whereRevision = sinon.stub().returns({ update: updateRevision });
- const transacting = sinon.stub().withArgs("automation_action_revisions")
- .returns({ where: whereRevision });
- transacting.raw = sinon.stub().returns(emailSentCountExpression);
- const transaction = sinon.stub(db.knex, "transaction").callsFake(
- async (callback) => {
- return await callback(transacting);
- },
- );
- const addRecipient = sinon.stub(AutomatedEmailRecipient, "add").resolves();
+it("records the recipient and increments the action revision count", async function () {
+ const revision = await knex("automation_action_revisions").select("id")
+ .first();
+ assert(revision);
- await automationsApi.recordEmailSent({
- automationActionRevisionId: "revision-id",
+ await repo.recordEmailSent({
+ automationActionRevisionId: revision.id,
mailgunMessageId: "mailgun-message-id",
memberEmail: "member@example.com",
memberId: "member-id",
@@ -22,22 +13,28 @@
trackOpens: true,
});
- sinon.assert.calledOnce(transaction);
- sinon.assert.calledOnceWithExactly(addRecipient, {
+ const recipient = await knex("automated_email_recipients").first();
+ assert.deepEqual(recipient, {
+ id: recipient.id,
+ automation_action_revision_id: revision.id,
member_id: "member-id",
member_uuid: "00000000-0000-4000-8000-000000000001",
member_email: "member@example.com",
member_name: "Test Member",
- automation_action_revision_id: "revision-id",
mailgun_message_id: "mailgun-message-id",
- track_opens: true,
- }, { transacting });
- sinon.assert.calledOnceWithExactly(whereRevision, "id", "revision-id");
- sinon.assert.calledOnceWithExactly(transacting.raw, "COALESCE(??, 0) + ?", [
- "email_sent_count",
- 1,
- ]);
- sinon.assert.calledOnceWithExactly(updateRevision, {
- email_sent_count: emailSentCountExpression,
+ delivered_at: null,
+ opened_at: null,
+ track_opens: 1,
+ created_at: recipient.created_at,
+ updated_at: recipient.updated_at,
});
+ assert(ObjectId.isValid(recipient.id));
+ assert.equal(typeof recipient.created_at, "string");
+ assert.equal(recipient.updated_at, recipient.created_at);
+
+ const updatedRevision = await knex("automation_action_revisions")
+ .select("email_sent_count")
+ .where("id", revision.id)
+ .first();
+ assert.equal(updatedRevision.email_sent_count, 1);
});
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #29399 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 74.53% 74.50% -0.04%
==========================================
Files 1602 1602
Lines 140399 140406 +7
Branches 17060 17057 -3
==========================================
- Hits 104646 104609 -37
- Misses 34733 34743 +10
- Partials 1020 1054 +34
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
troyciesco
approved these changes
Jul 20, 2026
closes https://linear.app/ghost/issue/NY-1459 `automationsApi.recordEmailSent` was different from the others: it hit the database directly. Now it's part of the automations repository just like the rest. This change should have no user impact.
troyciesco
force-pushed
the
evanhahn-ny-1459-automations-apis-recordemailsent-function-should-use-the
branch
from
July 20, 2026 18:41
91c589d to
95900d3
Compare
troyciesco
deleted the
evanhahn-ny-1459-automations-apis-recordemailsent-function-should-use-the
branch
July 20, 2026 18:57
This was referenced Jul 20, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
closes https://linear.app/ghost/issue/NY-1459
automationsApi.recordEmailSentwas different from the others: it hit the database directly. Now it's part of the automations repository just like the rest.This cleanup should have no user impact.