Set `rfc724_mid` in `Message::new()`, `Message::new_text()`, and
`Message::default()` instead of when sending the message. This way the
rfc724 mid can be read in the draft stage which makes it more consistent
for bots. Tests had to be adjusted to create multiple messages to get
unique mid, otherwise core would not send the messages out.
this PR moves now advanced/unsupported ASM strings to core, removing
work from translations, esp. as another hint is added which would
require retranslations. it is better to have that just in english, it is
a nerd feature anyways.
moverover, this PR removes special rendering of ASM in the summary,
which might be confusion, but mainly it is now unneeded, dead code
i'll do another android PR that will point to "Add Second Device"
already on ASM generation EDIT: done at
https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-android/pull/3726
targets https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-desktop/issues/4946
instead of showing addresses in info message, provide an API to get the
contact-id.
UI can then make the info message tappable and open the contact profile
in scope
the corresponding iOS PR - incl. **screencast** - is at
https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-ios/pull/2652 ; jsonrpc can come
in a subsequent PR when things are settled on android/ios
the number of parameters in `add_info_msg_with_cmd` gets bigger and
bigger, however, i did not want to refactor this in this PR. it is also
not really adding complexity
closes#6702
---------
Co-authored-by: link2xt <link2xt@testrun.org>
Co-authored-by: Hocuri <hocuri@gmx.de>
Now that we are deduplicating everywhere, we can get rid of some code.
The old python bindings did not get an optional `name` parameter because
they are deprecated anyway, but it would be easy to add it.
> _greetings from the ice of the deutsche bahn 🚂🚃🚃🚃 always a pleasure to
see how well delta chat meanwhile performs in bad networks :)_
this PR adds an API to request other chat members to replace the message
text of an already sent message. scope is mainly to fix typos. this
feature is known from whatsapp, telegram, signal, and is
[requested](https://support.delta.chat/t/retract-edit-sent-messages/1918)
[since](https://support.delta.chat/t/edit-messages-in-delta-chat/899)
[years](https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-android/issues/198).
technically, a message with an
[`Obsoletes:`](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2076#section-3.6)
header is sent out.
```
From: alice@nine
To: bob@nine
Message-ID: 2000@nine
In-Reply-To: 1000@nine
Obsoletes: 1000@nine
Edited: this is the new text
```
the body is the new text, prefixed by the static text `Edited:` (which
is not a header). the latter is to make the message appear more nicely
in Non-Delta-MUA. save for the `In-Reply-To` header. the `Edited:`
prefix is removed by Delta Chat on receiving.
headers should be protected and moved to e2ee part as usual.
corrected message text is flagged, and UI should show this state, in
practise as "Edited" beside the date.
in case, the original message is not found, nothing happens and the
correction message is trashes (assuming the original was deleted).
question: is the `Obsoletes:` header a good choice? i _thought_ there is
some more specifica RFC, but i cannot find sth. in any case, it should
be an header that is not used otherwise by MUA, to make sure no wanted
messages disappear.
what is NOT done and out of scope:
- optimise if messages are not yet sent out. this is doable, but
introduces quite some cornercaes and may not be worth the effort
- replaces images or other attachments. this is also a bit cornercasy
and beyond "typo fixing", and better be handled by "delete for me and
others" (which may come soon, having the idea now, it seems easy :)
- get edit history in any way. not sure if this is worth the effort,
remember, as being a private messenger, we assume trust among chat
members. it is also questionable wrt privacy, seized devices etc.
- add text where nothing was before; again, scope is "typo fixing",
better avoid cornercases
- saved messages are not edited (this is anyway questionable)
- quoted texts, that are used for the case the original message is
deleted, are not updated
- edits are ignored when the original message is not there yet (out of
order, not yet downloaded)
- message status indicator does not show if edits are sent out or not -
similar to reactions, webxdc updates, sync messages. signal has the same
issue :) still, connectivity should show if there are messages pending
<img width="366" alt="Screenshot 2025-02-17 at 17 25 02"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a4a53996-438b-47ef-9004-2c9062eea5d7"
/>
corresponding iOS branch (no PR yet):
https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-ios/compare/main...r10s/edit-messages
---------
Co-authored-by: l <link2xt@testrun.org>
Deduplicate:
- In the REPL
- In `store_from_base64()`, which writes avatars received in headers
- In a few tests
- The saved messages, broadcast, device, archive icons
- The autocrypt setup message
1-2 more PRs, and we can get rid of `BlobObject::create`,
`sanitise_name()`, and some others
When receiving messages, blobs will be deduplicated with the new
function `create_and_deduplicate_from_bytes()`. For sending files, this
adds a new function `set_file_and_deduplicate()` instead of
deduplicating by default.
This is for
https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-core-rust/issues/6265; read the
issue description there for more details.
TODO:
- [x] Set files as read-only
- [x] Don't do a write when the file is already identical
- [x] The first 32 chars or so of the 64-character hash are enough. I
calculated that if 10b people (i.e. all of humanity) use DC, and each of
them has 200k distinct blob files (I have 4k in my day-to-day account),
and we used 20 chars, then the expected value for the number of name
collisions would be ~0.0002 (and the probability that there is a least
one name collision is lower than that) [^1]. I added 12 more characters
to be on the super safe side, but this wouldn't be necessary and I could
also make it 20 instead of 32.
- Not 100% sure whether that's necessary at all - it would mainly be
necessary if we might hit a length limit on some file systems (the
blobdir is usually sth like
`accounts/2ff9fc096d2f46b6832b24a1ed99c0d6/dc.db-blobs` (53 chars), plus
64 chars for the filename would be 117).
- [x] "touch" the files to prevent them from being deleted
- [x] TODOs in the code
For later PRs:
- Replace `BlobObject::create(…)` with
`BlobObject::create_and_deduplicate(…)` in order to deduplicate
everytime core creates a file
- Modify JsonRPC to deduplicate blob files
- Possibly rename BlobObject.name to BlobObject.file in order to prevent
confusion (because `name` usually means "user-visible-name", not "name
of the file on disk").
[^1]: Calculated with both https://printfn.github.io/fend/ and
https://www.geogebra.org/calculator, both of which came to the same
result
([1](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/bbb62550-3781-48b5-88b1-ba0e29c28c0d),
[2](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/82171212-b797-4117-a39f-0e132eac7252))
---------
Co-authored-by: l <link2xt@testrun.org>
> _took quite some time until i found the time to finish this PR and to
find a time window that does not disturb other developments too much,
but here we are:_
this PR enables UI to improve "Saved messages" hugely, bringing it on
WhatsApp's "Starred Messages" or Telegram's "Saved Messages" level. with
this PR, UIs can add the following functionality with few effort ([~100
loc on iOS](https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-ios/pull/2527)):
- add a "Save" button in the messages context menu, allowing to save a
message
- show directly in the chat if a message was saved, eg. by a little star
★
- in "Saved Messages", show the message in its context - so with author,
avatar, date and keep incoming/outgoing state
- in "Saved Messages", a button to go to the original message can be
added
- if the original message was deleted, one can still go to the original
chat
these features were often requested, in the forum, but also in many
one-to-one discussions, recently at the global gathering.
moreover, in contrast to the old method with "forward to saved", no
traffic is wasted - the messages are saved locally, and only a small
sync messages is sent around
this is how it looks out on iOS:
<img width="260" alt="Screenshot 2025-01-17 at 00 02 51"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/902741b6-167f-4af1-9f9a-bd0439dd20d0"
/> <img width="353" alt="Screenshot 2025-01-17 at 00 05
33"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/97eceb79-6e43-4a89-9792-2e077e7141cd"
/>
technically, still a copy is done from the original message (with
already now deduplicated blobs), so that things work nicely with
deletion modes; eg. you can save an important message and preserve it
from deletion that way.
jsonrpc can be done in a subsequent PR, i was implementing the UI on iOS
where that was not needed (and most API were part of message object that
is not in use in jsonrpc atm)
@hpk42 the forward issue we discussed earller that day is already solved
(first implementation did not had an explict save_msgs() but was using
forward_msgs(SELF) as saving - with the disadvantage that forwarding to
SELF is not working, eg. if one wants the old behaviour) acutally, that
made the PR a lot nicer, as now very few existing code is changed
<details>
<summary>previous considerations and abandoned things</summary>
while working on this PR, there was also the idea to just set a flag
“starred” in the message table and not copy anything. however, while
tempting, that would result in more complexity, questions and drawbacks
in UI:
- delete-message, delete-chat, auto-deletion, clear-chat would raise
questions - what do do with the “Starred”? having a copy in “Saved
Messages” does not raise this question
- newly saved messages appear naturally as “new” in “Saved Messages”,
simply setting a flag would show them somewhere in between - unless we
do additional effort
- “Saved Messages” already has its place in the UI - and allows to
_directly_ save things there as well - not easily doable with “starring”
- one would need to re-do many things that already exist in “Saved
Messages”, at least in core
- one idea to solve some of the issues could be to have “Starred” as
well as “Saved Messages” - however, that would irritate user, one would
remember exactly what was done with a message, and understand the fine
differences
whatsapp does this “starred”, btw, so when original is deleted, starred
is deleted as well. Telegram does things similar to us, Signal does
nothing. Whatsapp has a per-chat view for starred messages - if needed,
we could do sth. like that as well, however, let’s first see how far the
“all view” goes (in contrast to whatsapp, we have profiles for
separation as well)
for the wording: “saving” is what we’re doing here, this is much more on
point as “starring” - which is more the idea of a “bookmark”, and i
think, whatsapp uses this wording to not raise false expectations
(still, i know of ppl that were quite upset that a “starred” message was
deleted when eg. the chat was cleared to save some memory)
wrt webxdc app updates: options that come into mind were: _empty_ (as
now), _snapshot_ (copy all updates) or _shortcut_ (always open
original). i am not sure what the best solution is, the easiest was
_empty_, so i went for that, as it is (a) obvious, and what is already
done with forwarding and (b) the original is easy to open now (in
contrast to forwarding).
so, might totally be that we need or want to tweak things here, but i
would leave that outside the first iteration, things are not worsened in
that area
wrt reactions: as things are detached, similar to webxdc updates, we do
not not to show the original reactions - that way, one can use reactions
for private markers (telegram is selling that feature :)
to the icon: a disk or a bookmark might be other options, but the star
is nicer and also know from other apps - and anyways a but vague UX
wise. so i think, it is fine
finally, known issue is that if a message was saved that does not exist
on another device, it does not get there. i think, that issue is a weak
one, and can be ignored mostly, most times, user will save messages soon
after receiving, and if on some devices auto-deletion is done, it is
maybe not even expected to have suddenly another copy there
</details>
EDIT: once this is merged, detailed issues about what to do should be
filed for android/desktop (however, they do not have urgency to adapt,
things will continue working as is)
---------
Co-authored-by: Hocuri <hocuri@gmx.de>
