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

SMS to include region contact number stubbed but not executed #273

Open
frankduncan opened this issue Jan 6, 2019 · 1 comment
Open
Labels

Comments

@frankduncan
Copy link

A followup to #129, the code for putting in the region contact number into the SMS going out to the user on signup for a smoke alarm has a stub for the region contact number. However, that number isn't always there, and so the generic redcross number is in there. Is it better to have a conditional here for when the contact number does exist, or just to remove it? Given that it's been this way for 3 years, it may be best to just accept current functionality as correct, and make the code reflect that.

Also, in light of #264, if we decide to include the contact phone number, how do we handle the messaging when there's more than one designated contact for a region?

@kfogel and @OhMcGoo, for discussion :)

@kfogel
Copy link
Member

kfogel commented Jan 17, 2019

Hey, @OhMcGoo, please weigh in on this when you get a chance.

For now, @frankduncan and I have decided (just now on the phone) that the 1-800-REDCROSS number will continue to go out in every text, that Frank will not add a phone-number column to the "Users" table (reminder: the rows in that table represent admin users w/ logins, not people requesting smoke alarms) just to preserve the currently-unused-anyway phone number field in the "Contacts" table, and if we want to add per-region contact phone numbers later we can do that as a separate project -- it would be a new enhancement, and it certainly should not delay or interfere with the rollout of the user-admininstration interface.

This seems to be the course that the conversation in issue #129 implies too, FWIW.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants