Adding a shared address book did nothing in one browser and worked in
another. The button was not broken; the refusal was invisible.
Subscribing is the one call in the app that writes to somebody else's
account, so it is the one a perfectly healthy server is entitled to say
no to -- and JMAP says no to a `/set` by answering successfully with the
object listed in `notUpdated`. Neither subscribe method looked. The
promise resolved, the code carried on, the re-read came back unchanged,
and the row stayed exactly where it was with nothing said.
Every other `/set` in this codebase reads `notUpdated` and raises. These
two were written without it, which is the whole defect: not a wrong
answer, an unread one.
Both now check it and say what the server said, which is the thing that
was missing -- whatever the underlying refusal turns out to be, it can be
read off the screen instead of guessed at from which browser was in
front of you.
An account linked for its files also offered its calendar and its address
book, and neither had been shared. That was not ihasmail inventing them:
asked about the other account, the live 0.16.19 returns every calendar
and every book it holds, each with full rights -- read, write, share,
delete, all true. There is nothing in the rights to tell "shared with me"
from "reachable at all", because the server does not distinguish them.
`isSubscribed` does, and it is the field JMAP has for exactly this: it
came back false on all of them. So a shared calendar or book is listed
under "Shared with me" once the reader has added it, and under "Available
to add" until then, with one button either way.
Nothing unsubscribed contributes anything. A calendar that has not been
added draws no events, and a book that has not been added lends no cards
to the To field -- which is the one that mattered most, since it is the
difference between offering a colleague's contacts and offering a
stranger's without anyone having asked.
The mock's shared calendar and address book now arrive unsubscribed, the
way the real server hands them over, so the adding is exercised rather
than skipped; and its `Calendar/set` and `AddressBook/set` route by
account, since subscribing to somebody else's is a write to their
account and the mock had nowhere to put it.
Verified against the mock: the shared calendar sits under "Available to
add" with no events in the grid, adding it moves it to "Shared with me"
and its events appear, removing it undoes both; and `suggest("katherine")`
finds nothing until the shared book is added, then finds her.
Address book sharing was withdrawn a few hours ago on a report that it
behaved like mail folder sharing. That was wrong -- it works -- and it is
back, built the way Files is rather than the way it was.
Three things it inherits from Files. Shared books are listed in the app's
own left pane instead of behind an account switch in the profile menu.
The reader's books and other people's sit under separate headings, since
a book belonging to somebody else behaves differently and a single merged
list would be quiet about whose contacts you are reading. And opening
Contacts re-reads the session, so a book shared while the tab was open
turns up without signing out and in again.
The books pane the view kept to itself is gone, and with it the last
module that ignored the sidebar it was given.
The one thing Files does not need: shared contacts have to answer when
somebody types a name into a To field, so they are loaded up front rather
than when a book is opened, and they are offered by `suggest` and found
by `lookupByEmail` alongside the reader's own. Their own cards win a tie,
since a card someone wrote themselves should beat a colleague's copy of
the same person. That is the difference between a shared book you can
look at and one you can use.
Cards from a shared account are held apart from the reader's rather than
merged in, and keyed by account as well as id. Ids are only unique within
an account -- two accounts each having a book `ab1` is ordinary -- and a
flat map would have had one silently replace the other.
The mock grew an address book in its shared account, with contacts in it,
because none of this could be exercised otherwise.
KNOWN-ISSUES records the withdrawal as the mistake it was rather than
leaving it in the history looking like a finding. Mail folder sharing
stays withdrawn: that one really is broken.
"Send failed: Invalid property or value." is Stalwart's description for
invalidProperties, and on its own it says nothing about what to fix. The
SetError also carries a `properties` array naming the offending fields, which
every call site was discarding.
setErrorMessage appends them, and the 35 places that surfaced a SetError -
send, save draft, mailboxes, calendars, contacts, sieve, files, signature
images, sharing - now go through it.
jcoffey-dev