[wrangler] Only allow "worker" queue consumer type in wrangler config

[tgarg-cf]

Fixes MQ-1262

Previously, non-worker consumer types (e.g. http_pull) could be specified in the queues.consumers config. If the type was http_pull, we would attach an HTTP-Pull consumer to a queue. This is unrelated to a worker and should not be something users should do while deploying a worker. Now, wrangler will error if a consumer type other than "worker" is specified in the config file.

---

• Tests
  • Tests included/updated
  • Automated tests not possible - manual testing has been completed as follows:
  • Additional testing not necessary because:
• Public documentation
  • Cloudflare docs PR(s): [Queues] Update HTTP pull consumer specification  cloudflare-docs#29279
  • Documentation not necessary because:

A picture of a cute animal (not mandatory, but encouraged)

---

[workers-devprod]

Codeowners approval required for this PR:

• ✅ @cloudflare/wrangler

Show detailed file reviewers

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 6142443

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[pkg-pr-new]

create-cloudflare

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/create-cloudflare@13018

@cloudflare/kv-asset-handler

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/kv-asset-handler@13018

miniflare

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/miniflare@13018

@cloudflare/pages-shared

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/pages-shared@13018

@cloudflare/unenv-preset

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/unenv-preset@13018

@cloudflare/vite-plugin

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/vite-plugin@13018

@cloudflare/vitest-pool-workers

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/vitest-pool-workers@13018

@cloudflare/workers-editor-shared

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/workers-editor-shared@13018

wrangler

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/wrangler@13018

commit: 6142443

[sdnts]

Can't actually approve, but I've taken a look and this looks good to me

[petebacondarwin]

Approved but I am trying to determine if this counts as a breaking change...

[petebacondarwin]

Looks like the type checks have a legitimate failure...

[tgarg-cf]

Looks like the type checks have a legitimate failure...

Ive tried to destructure it so that the trigger type and consumer type string don't intersect. I could also revert the type?: "worker" and make it type?: string as it was before. We wanted to strictly type it because we only want users to be able to put "worker" if they need to.

[petebacondarwin]

I'll fix it up for you