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

feat: add passive option to queue #184

Closed
wants to merge 7 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

zlintz
Copy link

@zlintz zlintz commented Dec 5, 2018

allows for checkQueue instead of assertQueue when clients have restricted permissions

fixes issue #183

allows for checkQueue instead of assertQueue when clients have restricted permissions

fixes issue arobson#183
@zlintz
Copy link
Author

zlintz commented Dec 5, 2018

Thanks for any of your time in advance for considering this!

@zlintz zlintz changed the title feat: add passive option to queueFsm feat: add passive option to queue Dec 5, 2018
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Dec 8, 2018

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.08%) to 89.036% when pulling 53b8649 on zlintz:master into 80b63c0 on arobson:master.

@zlintz
Copy link
Author

zlintz commented Dec 12, 2018

I am happy to hear any feedback as well

@zlintz
Copy link
Author

zlintz commented Jan 16, 2019

Just wanted to follow up on this as I haven't heard anything yet

@codepushr
Copy link

I really need this feature too... how come nobody reacted for this long?

@zlintz
Copy link
Author

zlintz commented Jun 28, 2019

Not sure but I am planning to clone this repo to start maintaining this if things don't start happening. @arobson I would love to help to continue this one if possible.

@zlintz zlintz closed this Sep 19, 2019
@zlintz
Copy link
Author

zlintz commented Sep 19, 2019

Moving to something I can maintain unfortunately.
If anyone is interested -> https://github.com/zlintz/foo-foo-mq

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.

3 participants