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

Add effective_policy_definition to QueueInfo #461

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 14, 2024

Conversation

ifyun
Copy link
Contributor

@ifyun ifyun commented Jun 11, 2024

References #460

@pivotal-cla
Copy link

@ifyun Please sign the Contributor License Agreement!

Click here to manually synchronize the status of this Pull Request.

See the FAQ for frequently asked questions.

@pivotal-cla
Copy link

@ifyun Thank you for signing the Contributor License Agreement!

@acogoluegnes
Copy link
Contributor

@ifyun Thanks for the contribution. The changes look good, but could you re-submit the PR without the formatting changes? They are huge and unnecessary, and it makes the actual changes very hard to spot. Thanks.

@ifyun ifyun force-pushed the main branch 3 times, most recently from a724c47 to 83f8ca2 Compare June 12, 2024 15:02
@ifyun
Copy link
Contributor Author

ifyun commented Jun 12, 2024

Update to the correct format.

@acogoluegnes
Copy link
Contributor

Why did you add policyInfo with @JsonIgnore?

@ifyun
Copy link
Contributor Author

ifyun commented Jun 13, 2024

Why did you add policyInfo with @JsonIgnore?

policyInfo does not appear in the HTTP response, but I found that it could be injected into QueueInfo with priority, so I added this field with @JsonIgnore

@ifyun
Copy link
Contributor Author

ifyun commented Jun 13, 2024

I got mixed up, there shouldn't be a policyInfo field.

The changes are correct now.

@michaelklishin michaelklishin merged commit 941333b into rabbitmq:main Jun 14, 2024
2 checks passed
@michaelklishin
Copy link
Member

Thank you.

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.

4 participants