Revoking a share meant opening the share dialog, removing each person
from it in turn, and saving. That is the right tool for changing who has
access and the wrong one for withdrawing it altogether, which is the more
urgent of the two and the one someone is likely to want in a hurry.
Both now offer "Stop sharing" in the context menu, which clears the lot
after a confirmation saying how many people lose access. It appears only
when there is something to revoke, so the menu says whether a thing is
shared as well as offering to change it.
A calendar also says it is shared now. Address books have carried that
badge since they gained sharing; calendars never did, so the only way to
find out was to open the dialog and look -- which for the owner of a
dozen calendars means opening a dozen dialogs.
Both go through the existing update paths, so a server that refuses is
reported rather than swallowed.
Verified against the mock, both kinds: sharing one shows the badge and
adds the entry, confirming clears `shareWith`, the badge goes, and the
entry disappears with it since there is no longer anything to stop.
"You are not allowed to modify this address book." That is Stalwart's
answer to a sharee subscribing to a book shared read-only, and it is a
fair one: `isSubscribed` lives on the collection rather than on the
reader, so adding one is a write to the *owner's* account. The identical
write on a shared calendar is accepted. The difference is the server's.
So the flag is still asked for first -- a preference the server holds is
one every client agrees about -- and when it is refused the answer goes
in the reader's own synced settings instead, as `addedShares`, keyed by
account and collection. Either record counts as added, and the rule has
a test of its own because three components ask the question and they
must not drift apart.
Two things about how this hid. The refusal arrives as a *successful*
response with the id in `notUpdated`, so the version that ignored it saw
nothing wrong and the button simply did nothing -- fixed a commit ago,
and it is what turned "the + does nothing in Firefox" into a sentence
from the server. And it cannot be seen from the owner's account at all,
where the write succeeds: it took two browsers signed in as two accounts
to find, which is why it survived every check made from one.
The mock refuses the same write for the same reason. One that accepted
it would have gone on agreeing with the belief that shipped.
Verified against it: adding the shared book is refused by the server,
recorded in settings, and the book moves to "Shared with me" with its
contacts reaching the To field; removing undoes all three; and it
survives a full page reload, which is the point of putting it where the
settings live rather than in this tab.
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.
Three things from using it on two real accounts.
A calendar shared with you never appeared. Nothing was wrong with the
share -- the calendar had nowhere to be shown. Calendars loaded from one
account and one only, so the sharer's were reachable solely by switching
the whole app to their account, which is the door being closed below.
They now sit under "Shared with me" beside the reader's own, in their own
colour, with their events in the grid and a click to hide them like any
other calendar.
Their events go through `instancesIn`, the one funnel every view already
reads, so month, week, day and agenda got them without being touched.
Events and calendars from another account are keyed by account as well as
id, and hiding one is remembered under the same key: an id means nothing
outside the account holding it, and two accounts sharing an id is
ordinary rather than unlucky.
An account that shared nothing was listed in Files as though it had.
Every non-personal account was offered on the reasoning that its folders
could speak for themselves -- but an account whose *calendar* was shared
has no folders to speak with, and appeared as an invitation to open an
empty pane. Each is now asked for one file before being listed, and
silence is taken for an answer.
And the account switcher is gone from the profile menu. It existed to
reach what other people shared and was the wrong door: it moved the whole
app to somebody else's account, and since Stalwart advertises every
capability on a shared account, mail, calendar and contacts went with it
and were refused. Everything it was for is now in the module the share
belongs to, found without anyone needing to know an account was involved.
What this does not prove is that Stalwart delivers a calendar share at
all. The mock says the client handles one, which is the half that was
missing; whether the server behaves like address books, which work, or
like mail folders, which do not, needs the two accounts again.
Every user-visible date now goes through web/src/lib/datetime.ts, driven by
three settings (Settings > General > Locale):
- Language & region: automatic, or any of the 618 locales CLDR has data for,
each named in its own language and script (web/src/lib/locales.ts, generated
by probing Intl over the subtag space).
- Date format: automatic (locale order), 22.11.2025, 22/11/2025, 11/22/2025,
or ISO 8601 2025-11-22.
- Time format: automatic (locale), 24-hour, or 12-hour.
Automatic takes the locale Stalwart has for the account, read best-effort at
login via x:Account/get (urn:stalwart:jmap) and passed to the client in the
session; servers without the capability, or that deny sysAccountGet to a
regular user, fall back to the browser locale. POSIX forms are normalised
(de_DE.UTF-8 -> de-DE) and script modifiers kept (sr_RS@latin -> sr-Latn-RS,
uz_UZ@cyrillic -> uz-Cyrl-UZ), while dialect/variant/currency modifiers are
dropped and a script the locale already implies is not appended.
Numerals follow the locale (22.11.2025 renders as Arabic-Indic digits under
ar-EG); ISO 8601 is the exception and pins date and clock to Latin digits so
one line never mixes digit systems.
Rewired: message list and headers, quoted reply headers, calendar (titles,
weekday and hour gutters, mini calendar, agenda, popovers, invite cards,
free/busy), contacts, files, sessions. No raw toLocale*String date calls are
left in web/src.
Native <input type="datetime-local"> pickers always follow the browser locale
and cannot be restyled by a page, so the out-of-office fields echo the entered
instant in the chosen format underneath.
Also: month-grid day labels no longer wrap when they hold a date, and the mock
server serves x:Account/get (MOCK_LOCALE, default en_US).
Closes#1
jcoffey-dev