Feature/entry validation alerts

[mcelaney]

Closes #98

Description:
Once a day, we should have a scheduled job that reviews all the entries submitted by the team during that day. The task should probably run every weekday at 8pm in the user's local time zone as defined by Slack.

Initially only internal employees would receive these messages. We determine which users to include by inspecting the @ombuteam on Slack.

The job would check that the entries are well formed. They should meet this criteria:

• They should have a description that is more than two words.
• If the entry doesn't have a #calls label, then it should have a JIRA ID.
• If the entry doesn't have a JIRA ID or URL, then it should notify the person in Slack

The notification should include a list of entries that look suspicious. Here is a template:

@etagwerker Hi Ernesto, I found these entries that are missing a JIRA ticket or ID: 

- Did work (3 hours) 
- Worked on stuff (1 hour) 

Please make sure that these entries are accurate. If they are all good, great! If not, please make sure you fix them so you don't get penalized for any of them!

To Do

• Create and permission a Slack Bot
• Build a Slack Service to utilize the Web API of the Slack Bot
• Build a rules system to assess time entry descriptions
• Build a TimeEntry domain to manage finding the correct Slack Users, current entries, and validation logic
• Build a rake task to utilize this domain
• Set up a cron job to call the rake task on a 1 hour interval

QA

• tests pass
• Add yourself to the pecas_dev group on Slack
• Add a time entry for today that lacks a Jira ticket, url, or the #calls tag
• spin up the app between 7pm and 8pm
• You should get a message on Slack an hour late.

I will abide by the code of conduct.

[mcelaney]

The cron job seems to be working but it's the part I'm least confident in... so if someone with more experience in Docker could pay extra attention to my changes there could have a look I'd appreciate it.

[kindoflew]

hey @bronzdoc, your DevOps wisdom is needed! could you review this when you have the time? thanks!

[bronzdoc]

@mcelaney I left some comments regarding style, mocking, and a suggestion for the docker problem. Let me know what you think, thanks!

[mcelaney]

#101 (comment)

@bronzdoc Makes sense to me. I'll pull the cron stuff back out.

[lubc]

@bronzdoc hey, looks like this is ready for re-review

[kindoflew]

@bronzdoc

[mcelaney]

This PR is blocked by #100

[lubc]

@arielj hey, do you think you can help review this PR? If you don't have time I can try to find someone else. Thank you!

[kindoflew]

@mcelaney this has some merge conflicts now.

@bronzdoc do you have time to review this again? if not i can ping someone else.

[bronzdoc]

LGTM, still needs a rebase tho

[bronzdoc]

Can we remove this commented code?

[etagwerker]

I've tested this locally and it seems to behave as expected. I had to tweak something in the spec so that it passes (both locally and in CI)