Alertmanager 0.1 and restricting to tracked projects

[superdump]

This is all a bit of a hack.

Basically to 'enable' alerts from prometheus to be sent to a room, I just !prometheus track prometheus in that room. prometheus is set as a known_project in the config file so that then when issuing that command, the room state is changed for tracking.

Then, when the NEB instance is hit on the prometheus endpoint, it checks the room's state to see if the prometheus plugin state member for the room contains anything (it doesn't do actual project matching as I'm not plucking anything from the prometheus alertmanager payload to identify it yet) and if so then it will send the message to that room, else not.

[kegsay]

Your comments say "try" - does this mean this is an either/or situation? If so, can we please have the control flow indicate this (e.g. via an if else) rather than blindly processing both types.

If it is possible for both types to co-exist in the same webhook, then can you tweak the wording so it's less confusing, thanks!

[superdump]

I find the code as it is to be much simpler and more readable. It should be an either or situation, but process_alerts() does nothing in the case that there are no alerts. The alternative is code that looks like this:

        alerts = json_data.get("alert", [])
        if len(alerts) > 0:
            process_alerts(alerts, Template(self.store.get("v1_message_template")))
        else:
            alerts = json_data.get("alerts", [])
            if len(alerts) > 0:
                process_alerts(, Template(self.store.get("v2_message_template")))

Which to me feels unnecessarily verbose. I will make the change to that if you want me to.

[kegsay]

Broadly speaking, this LGTM.

I'm not familiar with the Prometheus webhook API, so I would like to see some comments which explain the hack and how the hack can be fixed (mainly where that information would be coming from).

[kegsay]

Also, if you can mention somewhere about Alertmanager 0.1 support in the code itself rather than just the title of this PR that would be super. You also said you tested it with a fabricated payload - there's no shame in putting said payload as a block comment on_receive_webhook so readers can more easily see what data they're working with.

[mweinelt]

maybe put the closing bracket ) into the newline, to increase readability.

[superdump]

I agree. This was a copy and paste from the jenkins plugin with only indentation changes. I thought it was difficult to see the closing ) too.