zulip/zerver/tests/test_message_edit_notificat...

449 lines
15 KiB
Python
Raw Normal View History

Notify offline users about edited stream messages. We now do push notifications and missed message emails for offline users who are subscribed to the stream for a message that has been edited, but we short circuit the offline-notification logic for any user who presumably would have already received a notification on the original message. This effectively boils down to sending notifications to newly mentioned users. The motivating use case here is that you forget to mention somebody in a message, and then you edit the message to mention the person. If they are offline, they will now get pushed notifications and missed message emails, with some minor caveats. We try to mostly use the same techniques here as the send-message code path, and we share common code with the send-message path once we get to the Tornado layer and call maybe_enqueue_notifications. The major places where we differ are in a function called maybe_enqueue_notifications_for_message_update, and the top of that function short circuits a bunch of cases where we can mostly assume that the original message had an offline notification. We can expect a couple changes in the future: * Requirements may change here, and it might make sense to send offline notifications on the update side even in circumstances where the original message had a notification. * We may track more notifications in a DB model, which may simplify our short-circuit logic. In the view/action layer, we already had two separate codepaths for send-message and update-message, but this mostly echoes what the send-message path does in terms of collecting data about recipients.
2017-10-03 16:25:12 +02:00
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
from typing import Any, Dict, Generator, Mapping, Text, Union
import mock
from django.utils.timezone import now as timezone_now
from zerver.lib.actions import (
get_client,
)
from zerver.lib.test_classes import (
ZulipTestCase,
)
from zerver.models import (
get_stream_recipient,
Notify offline users about edited stream messages. We now do push notifications and missed message emails for offline users who are subscribed to the stream for a message that has been edited, but we short circuit the offline-notification logic for any user who presumably would have already received a notification on the original message. This effectively boils down to sending notifications to newly mentioned users. The motivating use case here is that you forget to mention somebody in a message, and then you edit the message to mention the person. If they are offline, they will now get pushed notifications and missed message emails, with some minor caveats. We try to mostly use the same techniques here as the send-message code path, and we share common code with the send-message path once we get to the Tornado layer and call maybe_enqueue_notifications. The major places where we differ are in a function called maybe_enqueue_notifications_for_message_update, and the top of that function short circuits a bunch of cases where we can mostly assume that the original message had an offline notification. We can expect a couple changes in the future: * Requirements may change here, and it might make sense to send offline notifications on the update side even in circumstances where the original message had a notification. * We may track more notifications in a DB model, which may simplify our short-circuit logic. In the view/action layer, we already had two separate codepaths for send-message and update-message, but this mostly echoes what the send-message path does in terms of collecting data about recipients.
2017-10-03 16:25:12 +02:00
Recipient,
Subscription,
UserPresence,
)
from zerver.tornado.event_queue import (
maybe_enqueue_notifications,
)
class EditMessageSideEffectsTest(ZulipTestCase):
def _assert_update_does_not_notify_anybody(self, message_id, content):
# type: (int, Text) -> None
url = '/json/messages/' + str(message_id)
request = dict(
message_id=message_id,
content=content,
)
with mock.patch('zerver.tornado.event_queue.maybe_enqueue_notifications') as m:
result = self.client_patch(url, request)
self.assert_json_success(result)
self.assertFalse(m.called)
def test_updates_with_pm_mention(self):
# type: () -> None
hamlet = self.example_user('hamlet')
cordelia = self.example_user('cordelia')
self.login(hamlet.email)
message_id = self.send_personal_message(
Notify offline users about edited stream messages. We now do push notifications and missed message emails for offline users who are subscribed to the stream for a message that has been edited, but we short circuit the offline-notification logic for any user who presumably would have already received a notification on the original message. This effectively boils down to sending notifications to newly mentioned users. The motivating use case here is that you forget to mention somebody in a message, and then you edit the message to mention the person. If they are offline, they will now get pushed notifications and missed message emails, with some minor caveats. We try to mostly use the same techniques here as the send-message code path, and we share common code with the send-message path once we get to the Tornado layer and call maybe_enqueue_notifications. The major places where we differ are in a function called maybe_enqueue_notifications_for_message_update, and the top of that function short circuits a bunch of cases where we can mostly assume that the original message had an offline notification. We can expect a couple changes in the future: * Requirements may change here, and it might make sense to send offline notifications on the update side even in circumstances where the original message had a notification. * We may track more notifications in a DB model, which may simplify our short-circuit logic. In the view/action layer, we already had two separate codepaths for send-message and update-message, but this mostly echoes what the send-message path does in terms of collecting data about recipients.
2017-10-03 16:25:12 +02:00
hamlet.email,
cordelia.email,
content='no mention'
)
self._assert_update_does_not_notify_anybody(
message_id=message_id,
content='now we mention @**Cordelia Lear**',
)
def _login_and_send_original_stream_message(self, content):
# type: (Text) -> int
'''
Note our conventions here:
Hamlet is our logged in user (and sender).
Cordelia is the receiver we care about.
Scotland is the stream we send messages to.
'''
hamlet = self.example_user('hamlet')
cordelia = self.example_user('cordelia')
self.login(hamlet.email)
self.subscribe(hamlet, 'Scotland')
self.subscribe(cordelia, 'Scotland')
message_id = self.send_stream_message(
Notify offline users about edited stream messages. We now do push notifications and missed message emails for offline users who are subscribed to the stream for a message that has been edited, but we short circuit the offline-notification logic for any user who presumably would have already received a notification on the original message. This effectively boils down to sending notifications to newly mentioned users. The motivating use case here is that you forget to mention somebody in a message, and then you edit the message to mention the person. If they are offline, they will now get pushed notifications and missed message emails, with some minor caveats. We try to mostly use the same techniques here as the send-message code path, and we share common code with the send-message path once we get to the Tornado layer and call maybe_enqueue_notifications. The major places where we differ are in a function called maybe_enqueue_notifications_for_message_update, and the top of that function short circuits a bunch of cases where we can mostly assume that the original message had an offline notification. We can expect a couple changes in the future: * Requirements may change here, and it might make sense to send offline notifications on the update side even in circumstances where the original message had a notification. * We may track more notifications in a DB model, which may simplify our short-circuit logic. In the view/action layer, we already had two separate codepaths for send-message and update-message, but this mostly echoes what the send-message path does in terms of collecting data about recipients.
2017-10-03 16:25:12 +02:00
hamlet.email,
'Scotland',
content=content,
)
return message_id
def _get_queued_data_for_message_update(self, message_id, content, expect_short_circuit=False):
# type: (int, Text, bool) -> Dict[str, Any]
'''
This function updates a message with a post to
/json/messages/(message_id).
By using mocks, we are able to capture two pieces of data:
enqueue_kwargs: These are the arguments passed in to
maybe_enqueue_notifications.
queue_messages: These are the messages that
maybe_enqueue_notifications actually
puts on the queue.
Using this helper allows you to construct a test that goes
pretty deep into the missed-messages codepath, without actually
queuing the final messages.
'''
url = '/json/messages/' + str(message_id)
request = dict(
message_id=message_id,
content=content,
)
with mock.patch('zerver.tornado.event_queue.maybe_enqueue_notifications') as m:
result = self.client_patch(url, request)
cordelia = self.example_user('cordelia')
cordelia_calls = [
call_args
for call_args in m.call_args_list
if call_args[1]['user_profile_id'] == cordelia.id
]
if expect_short_circuit:
self.assertEqual(len(cordelia_calls), 0)
return {}
# Normally we expect maybe_enqueue_notifications to be
# called for Cordelia, so continue on.
self.assertEqual(len(cordelia_calls), 1)
enqueue_kwargs = cordelia_calls[0][1]
queue_messages = []
def fake_publish(queue_name, event, *args):
# type: (str, Union[Mapping[str, Any], str], *Any) -> None
queue_messages.append(dict(
queue_name=queue_name,
event=event,
))
with mock.patch('zerver.tornado.event_queue.queue_json_publish') as m:
m.side_effect = fake_publish
maybe_enqueue_notifications(**enqueue_kwargs)
self.assert_json_success(result)
return dict(
enqueue_kwargs=enqueue_kwargs,
queue_messages=queue_messages
)
def test_updates_with_stream_mention(self):
# type: () -> None
message_id = self._login_and_send_original_stream_message(
content='no mention',
)
info = self._get_queued_data_for_message_update(
message_id=message_id,
content='now we mention @**Cordelia Lear**',
)
cordelia = self.example_user('cordelia')
expected_enqueue_kwargs = dict(
user_profile_id=cordelia.id,
message_id=message_id,
private_message=False,
mentioned=True,
stream_push_notify=False,
stream_name='Scotland',
always_push_notify=False,
idle=True,
already_notified={},
Notify offline users about edited stream messages. We now do push notifications and missed message emails for offline users who are subscribed to the stream for a message that has been edited, but we short circuit the offline-notification logic for any user who presumably would have already received a notification on the original message. This effectively boils down to sending notifications to newly mentioned users. The motivating use case here is that you forget to mention somebody in a message, and then you edit the message to mention the person. If they are offline, they will now get pushed notifications and missed message emails, with some minor caveats. We try to mostly use the same techniques here as the send-message code path, and we share common code with the send-message path once we get to the Tornado layer and call maybe_enqueue_notifications. The major places where we differ are in a function called maybe_enqueue_notifications_for_message_update, and the top of that function short circuits a bunch of cases where we can mostly assume that the original message had an offline notification. We can expect a couple changes in the future: * Requirements may change here, and it might make sense to send offline notifications on the update side even in circumstances where the original message had a notification. * We may track more notifications in a DB model, which may simplify our short-circuit logic. In the view/action layer, we already had two separate codepaths for send-message and update-message, but this mostly echoes what the send-message path does in terms of collecting data about recipients.
2017-10-03 16:25:12 +02:00
)
self.assertEqual(info['enqueue_kwargs'], expected_enqueue_kwargs)
queue_messages = info['queue_messages']
self.assertEqual(len(queue_messages), 2)
self.assertEqual(queue_messages[0]['queue_name'], 'missedmessage_mobile_notifications')
mobile_event = queue_messages[0]['event']
self.assertEqual(mobile_event['user_profile_id'], cordelia.id)
self.assertEqual(mobile_event['trigger'], 'mentioned')
Notify offline users about edited stream messages. We now do push notifications and missed message emails for offline users who are subscribed to the stream for a message that has been edited, but we short circuit the offline-notification logic for any user who presumably would have already received a notification on the original message. This effectively boils down to sending notifications to newly mentioned users. The motivating use case here is that you forget to mention somebody in a message, and then you edit the message to mention the person. If they are offline, they will now get pushed notifications and missed message emails, with some minor caveats. We try to mostly use the same techniques here as the send-message code path, and we share common code with the send-message path once we get to the Tornado layer and call maybe_enqueue_notifications. The major places where we differ are in a function called maybe_enqueue_notifications_for_message_update, and the top of that function short circuits a bunch of cases where we can mostly assume that the original message had an offline notification. We can expect a couple changes in the future: * Requirements may change here, and it might make sense to send offline notifications on the update side even in circumstances where the original message had a notification. * We may track more notifications in a DB model, which may simplify our short-circuit logic. In the view/action layer, we already had two separate codepaths for send-message and update-message, but this mostly echoes what the send-message path does in terms of collecting data about recipients.
2017-10-03 16:25:12 +02:00
self.assertEqual(queue_messages[1]['queue_name'], 'missedmessage_emails')
email_event = queue_messages[1]['event']
self.assertEqual(email_event['user_profile_id'], cordelia.id)
self.assertEqual(email_event['trigger'], 'mentioned')
Notify offline users about edited stream messages. We now do push notifications and missed message emails for offline users who are subscribed to the stream for a message that has been edited, but we short circuit the offline-notification logic for any user who presumably would have already received a notification on the original message. This effectively boils down to sending notifications to newly mentioned users. The motivating use case here is that you forget to mention somebody in a message, and then you edit the message to mention the person. If they are offline, they will now get pushed notifications and missed message emails, with some minor caveats. We try to mostly use the same techniques here as the send-message code path, and we share common code with the send-message path once we get to the Tornado layer and call maybe_enqueue_notifications. The major places where we differ are in a function called maybe_enqueue_notifications_for_message_update, and the top of that function short circuits a bunch of cases where we can mostly assume that the original message had an offline notification. We can expect a couple changes in the future: * Requirements may change here, and it might make sense to send offline notifications on the update side even in circumstances where the original message had a notification. * We may track more notifications in a DB model, which may simplify our short-circuit logic. In the view/action layer, we already had two separate codepaths for send-message and update-message, but this mostly echoes what the send-message path does in terms of collecting data about recipients.
2017-10-03 16:25:12 +02:00
def test_second_mention_is_ignored(self):
# type: () -> None
message_id = self._login_and_send_original_stream_message(
content='hello @**Cordelia Lear**'
)
self._get_queued_data_for_message_update(
message_id=message_id,
content='re-mention @**Cordelia Lear**',
expect_short_circuit=True,
)
def _turn_on_stream_push_for_cordelia(self):
# type: () -> None
'''
conventions:
Cordelia is the message receiver we care about.
Scotland is our stream.
'''
cordelia = self.example_user('cordelia')
stream = self.subscribe(cordelia, 'Scotland')
recipient = get_stream_recipient(stream.id)
Notify offline users about edited stream messages. We now do push notifications and missed message emails for offline users who are subscribed to the stream for a message that has been edited, but we short circuit the offline-notification logic for any user who presumably would have already received a notification on the original message. This effectively boils down to sending notifications to newly mentioned users. The motivating use case here is that you forget to mention somebody in a message, and then you edit the message to mention the person. If they are offline, they will now get pushed notifications and missed message emails, with some minor caveats. We try to mostly use the same techniques here as the send-message code path, and we share common code with the send-message path once we get to the Tornado layer and call maybe_enqueue_notifications. The major places where we differ are in a function called maybe_enqueue_notifications_for_message_update, and the top of that function short circuits a bunch of cases where we can mostly assume that the original message had an offline notification. We can expect a couple changes in the future: * Requirements may change here, and it might make sense to send offline notifications on the update side even in circumstances where the original message had a notification. * We may track more notifications in a DB model, which may simplify our short-circuit logic. In the view/action layer, we already had two separate codepaths for send-message and update-message, but this mostly echoes what the send-message path does in terms of collecting data about recipients.
2017-10-03 16:25:12 +02:00
cordelia_subscription = Subscription.objects.get(
user_profile_id=cordelia.id,
recipient=recipient,
)
cordelia_subscription.push_notifications = True
cordelia_subscription.save()
def test_updates_with_stream_push_notify(self):
# type: () -> None
self._turn_on_stream_push_for_cordelia()
message_id = self._login_and_send_original_stream_message(
content='no mention'
)
# Even though Cordelia configured this stream for pushes,
# we short-ciruit the logic, assuming the original message
# also did a push.
self._get_queued_data_for_message_update(
message_id=message_id,
content='nothing special about updated message',
expect_short_circuit=True,
)
def _cordelia_connected_to_zulip(self):
# type: () -> Any
'''
Right now the easiest way to make Cordelia look
connected to Zulip is to mock the function below.
This is a bit blunt, as it affects other users too,
but we only really look at Cordelia's data, anyway.
'''
return mock.patch(
'zerver.tornado.event_queue.receiver_is_off_zulip',
return_value=False
)
def test_stream_push_notify_for_sorta_present_user(self):
# type: () -> None
self._turn_on_stream_push_for_cordelia()
message_id = self._login_and_send_original_stream_message(
content='no mention'
)
# Simulate Cordelia still has an actively polling client, but
# the lack of presence info should still mark her as offline.
#
# Despite Cordelia being offline, we still short circuit
# offline notifications due to the her stream push setting.
with self._cordelia_connected_to_zulip():
self._get_queued_data_for_message_update(
message_id=message_id,
content='nothing special about updated message',
expect_short_circuit=True,
)
def _make_cordelia_present_on_web(self):
# type: () -> None
cordelia = self.example_user('cordelia')
UserPresence.objects.create(
user_profile_id=cordelia.id,
status=UserPresence.ACTIVE,
client=get_client('web'),
timestamp=timezone_now(),
)
def test_stream_push_notify_for_fully_present_user(self):
# type: () -> None
self._turn_on_stream_push_for_cordelia()
message_id = self._login_and_send_original_stream_message(
content='no mention'
)
self._make_cordelia_present_on_web()
# Simulate Cordelia is FULLY present, not just in term of
# browser activity, but also in terms of her client descriptors.
with self._cordelia_connected_to_zulip():
self._get_queued_data_for_message_update(
message_id=message_id,
content='nothing special about updated message',
expect_short_circuit=True,
)
def test_always_push_notify_for_fully_present_mentioned_user(self):
# type: () -> None
cordelia = self.example_user('cordelia')
cordelia.enable_online_push_notifications = True
cordelia.save()
message_id = self._login_and_send_original_stream_message(
content='no mention'
)
self._make_cordelia_present_on_web()
# Simulate Cordelia is FULLY present, not just in term of
# browser activity, but also in terms of her client descriptors.
with self._cordelia_connected_to_zulip():
info = self._get_queued_data_for_message_update(
message_id=message_id,
content='newly mention @**Cordelia Lear**',
)
expected_enqueue_kwargs = dict(
user_profile_id=cordelia.id,
message_id=message_id,
private_message=False,
mentioned=True,
stream_push_notify=False,
stream_name='Scotland',
always_push_notify=True,
idle=False,
already_notified={},
Notify offline users about edited stream messages. We now do push notifications and missed message emails for offline users who are subscribed to the stream for a message that has been edited, but we short circuit the offline-notification logic for any user who presumably would have already received a notification on the original message. This effectively boils down to sending notifications to newly mentioned users. The motivating use case here is that you forget to mention somebody in a message, and then you edit the message to mention the person. If they are offline, they will now get pushed notifications and missed message emails, with some minor caveats. We try to mostly use the same techniques here as the send-message code path, and we share common code with the send-message path once we get to the Tornado layer and call maybe_enqueue_notifications. The major places where we differ are in a function called maybe_enqueue_notifications_for_message_update, and the top of that function short circuits a bunch of cases where we can mostly assume that the original message had an offline notification. We can expect a couple changes in the future: * Requirements may change here, and it might make sense to send offline notifications on the update side even in circumstances where the original message had a notification. * We may track more notifications in a DB model, which may simplify our short-circuit logic. In the view/action layer, we already had two separate codepaths for send-message and update-message, but this mostly echoes what the send-message path does in terms of collecting data about recipients.
2017-10-03 16:25:12 +02:00
)
self.assertEqual(info['enqueue_kwargs'], expected_enqueue_kwargs)
queue_messages = info['queue_messages']
self.assertEqual(len(queue_messages), 1)
def test_always_push_notify_for_fully_present_boring_user(self):
# type: () -> None
cordelia = self.example_user('cordelia')
cordelia.enable_online_push_notifications = True
cordelia.save()
message_id = self._login_and_send_original_stream_message(
content='no mention'
)
self._make_cordelia_present_on_web()
# Simulate Cordelia is FULLY present, not just in term of
# browser activity, but also in terms of her client descriptors.
with self._cordelia_connected_to_zulip():
info = self._get_queued_data_for_message_update(
message_id=message_id,
content='nothing special about updated message',
)
expected_enqueue_kwargs = dict(
user_profile_id=cordelia.id,
message_id=message_id,
private_message=False,
mentioned=False,
stream_push_notify=False,
stream_name='Scotland',
always_push_notify=True,
idle=False,
already_notified={},
Notify offline users about edited stream messages. We now do push notifications and missed message emails for offline users who are subscribed to the stream for a message that has been edited, but we short circuit the offline-notification logic for any user who presumably would have already received a notification on the original message. This effectively boils down to sending notifications to newly mentioned users. The motivating use case here is that you forget to mention somebody in a message, and then you edit the message to mention the person. If they are offline, they will now get pushed notifications and missed message emails, with some minor caveats. We try to mostly use the same techniques here as the send-message code path, and we share common code with the send-message path once we get to the Tornado layer and call maybe_enqueue_notifications. The major places where we differ are in a function called maybe_enqueue_notifications_for_message_update, and the top of that function short circuits a bunch of cases where we can mostly assume that the original message had an offline notification. We can expect a couple changes in the future: * Requirements may change here, and it might make sense to send offline notifications on the update side even in circumstances where the original message had a notification. * We may track more notifications in a DB model, which may simplify our short-circuit logic. In the view/action layer, we already had two separate codepaths for send-message and update-message, but this mostly echoes what the send-message path does in terms of collecting data about recipients.
2017-10-03 16:25:12 +02:00
)
self.assertEqual(info['enqueue_kwargs'], expected_enqueue_kwargs)
queue_messages = info['queue_messages']
# Even though Cordelia has enable_online_push_notifications set
# to True, we don't send her any offline notifications, since she
# was not mentioned.
self.assertEqual(len(queue_messages), 0)
def test_updates_with_stream_mention_of_sorta_present_user(self):
# type: () -> None
cordelia = self.example_user('cordelia')
message_id = self._login_and_send_original_stream_message(
content='no mention'
)
# We will simulate that the user still has a an active client,
# but they don't have UserPresence rows, so we will still
# send offline notifications.
with self._cordelia_connected_to_zulip():
info = self._get_queued_data_for_message_update(
message_id=message_id,
content='now we mention @**Cordelia Lear**',
)
expected_enqueue_kwargs = dict(
user_profile_id=cordelia.id,
message_id=message_id,
private_message=False,
mentioned=True,
stream_push_notify=False,
stream_name='Scotland',
always_push_notify=False,
idle=True,
already_notified={},
Notify offline users about edited stream messages. We now do push notifications and missed message emails for offline users who are subscribed to the stream for a message that has been edited, but we short circuit the offline-notification logic for any user who presumably would have already received a notification on the original message. This effectively boils down to sending notifications to newly mentioned users. The motivating use case here is that you forget to mention somebody in a message, and then you edit the message to mention the person. If they are offline, they will now get pushed notifications and missed message emails, with some minor caveats. We try to mostly use the same techniques here as the send-message code path, and we share common code with the send-message path once we get to the Tornado layer and call maybe_enqueue_notifications. The major places where we differ are in a function called maybe_enqueue_notifications_for_message_update, and the top of that function short circuits a bunch of cases where we can mostly assume that the original message had an offline notification. We can expect a couple changes in the future: * Requirements may change here, and it might make sense to send offline notifications on the update side even in circumstances where the original message had a notification. * We may track more notifications in a DB model, which may simplify our short-circuit logic. In the view/action layer, we already had two separate codepaths for send-message and update-message, but this mostly echoes what the send-message path does in terms of collecting data about recipients.
2017-10-03 16:25:12 +02:00
)
self.assertEqual(info['enqueue_kwargs'], expected_enqueue_kwargs)
# She will get messages enqueued. (Other tests drill down on the
# actual content of these messages.)
self.assertEqual(len(info['queue_messages']), 2)
def test_updates_with_stream_mention_of_fully_present_user(self):
# type: () -> None
cordelia = self.example_user('cordelia')
message_id = self._login_and_send_original_stream_message(
content='no mention'
)
self._make_cordelia_present_on_web()
# Simulate Cordelia is FULLY present, not just in term of
# browser activity, but also in terms of her client descriptors.
with self._cordelia_connected_to_zulip():
info = self._get_queued_data_for_message_update(
message_id=message_id,
content='now we mention @**Cordelia Lear**',
)
expected_enqueue_kwargs = dict(
user_profile_id=cordelia.id,
message_id=message_id,
private_message=False,
mentioned=True,
stream_push_notify=False,
stream_name='Scotland',
always_push_notify=False,
idle=False,
already_notified={},
Notify offline users about edited stream messages. We now do push notifications and missed message emails for offline users who are subscribed to the stream for a message that has been edited, but we short circuit the offline-notification logic for any user who presumably would have already received a notification on the original message. This effectively boils down to sending notifications to newly mentioned users. The motivating use case here is that you forget to mention somebody in a message, and then you edit the message to mention the person. If they are offline, they will now get pushed notifications and missed message emails, with some minor caveats. We try to mostly use the same techniques here as the send-message code path, and we share common code with the send-message path once we get to the Tornado layer and call maybe_enqueue_notifications. The major places where we differ are in a function called maybe_enqueue_notifications_for_message_update, and the top of that function short circuits a bunch of cases where we can mostly assume that the original message had an offline notification. We can expect a couple changes in the future: * Requirements may change here, and it might make sense to send offline notifications on the update side even in circumstances where the original message had a notification. * We may track more notifications in a DB model, which may simplify our short-circuit logic. In the view/action layer, we already had two separate codepaths for send-message and update-message, but this mostly echoes what the send-message path does in terms of collecting data about recipients.
2017-10-03 16:25:12 +02:00
)
self.assertEqual(info['enqueue_kwargs'], expected_enqueue_kwargs)
# Because Cordelia is FULLY present, we don't need to send any offline
# push notifications or missed message emails.
self.assertEqual(len(info['queue_messages']), 0)