As we are using a dedicated CI relay instance, we don't need to be careful with creating test addresses.
But re-using test addresses in a test running in a single worker can leak events/messages which compromises test isolation.
Instead of encountering random flaky tests because let's just not cache addresses to maximize test isolation.
The chat is always going to be encrypted, this is enough.
We actually do mark the contact as verified,
but the meaning of this verification is unclear
and we don't even display it visibly in the chat anymore.
This value is not used for any logic
except the disappearing messages timer rollback prevention.
It is unlikely that non-chat clients
participate in chats with disappearing messages,
and the case was not tested anyway.
bail!() bubbles up the error until it lands in the device chat,
which is way over the top for a reaction that is filtered out by channel owner.
currently this happens, as arcance chat uses different default reactions.
in the future, this may happen even more often when we allow custom filters,
that may change over time.
Adds following stock strings:
- You were removed by %1$s.
- You were added by %1$s.
and implicit equivalents:
- You were removed.
- You were added.
Closes: #8419
Signed-off-by: Jagoda Ślązak <jslazak@jslazak.com>
previously only 10 messages were sent but if joinining did not succeed (due to slow CI sometimes) nothing would be received and the test would hang.
Also cleans up the tests to not set webxdc realtime config (true by default) and restructure helpers to reduce redundant code.
this PR adds the "message pinned state" to the "reaction state" that is
already sent together with resent channel messages since #8496.
this change is done in the first commit, and in fact only changes few
lines (one can consider to rename "broadcast_reactions.rs" and related
stuff to "broadcast_state.rs" in another PR: i did not to that in this
PR to keep diff and review simple).
moreover, in the second commit ,the "selection of messages to resent" is
changed to keep an additional focus on the pinned messages, so that the
most recent pinned messages are resent as well.
successor of #8496 and #8546
Adds `assert_warn`, `assert_error` and `assert_warns_or_errors`
methods to `TestContext`, that let us assert that
a certain warning or error is logged during the test.
Also asserts test logs should not contain any other
errors or warnings.
Adjusts tests accordingly.
Signed-off-by: Jagoda Ślązak <jslazak@jslazak.com>
Currently if there is an error fetching quota
then the HTML displays something like
```
example.com: Connected
Failed to parse
```
It's not clear that "Failed to parse" only refers to quota info.
Devices no longer implicitely use the From address of sync messages
to determine their primary transport. Receivers have no concept of it and own devices
may disagree on which relay is reachable because of VPN or different networks:
1. Make setting a primary transport (`configured_addr`) a per-device non-synced operation.
2. Transport rows (add/remove/unpublish) keep syncing like before.
3. A device reelects a primary if a sync message unpublished/removed the current primary
if there is a better candidate.
4. `TransportsModified` event is emitted at most once on an incoming transport sync message.
Users will notice the change in that changing primary transport in settings/advanced/relays
will not synchronize to other devices anymore.
Came across this while investigating more test_transport_synchronization flakiness,
sometimes missing TransportsModified events or getting a missing configured_addr.
The underlying problem was that stopping IO was triggered immediately during
receiving sync messages, potentially *canceling* the processing of the sync message,
effectively de-syncing the device's view on transports.
this PR, created together with @adbenitez, improves the connectivity
state passed to UI, which has changed a lot since multi relay:
- change the algorithm for `get_connectivity()`: this is roughly the
"best" connectivity of all relays now, so if one is connected, we're
already fine. this was discussed widely one to one, and that part
already closes#8554
- the PR adds a test for that, previously, that was untested
- additionally, do not regard unpublished relays in
`get_connectivity()`: e.g. unpublished relays are no longer given to
peers - so if only that is connected, the overall state should not be
"connected". therefore, we just ignore unpublished relays there
- in `get_connectivity_html()`, we continue showing unpublished relays,
however, we tune them down visually and flag them as such
- for the docs, remove the "range for some future use" wording. it was
never used like that, and that future will probably not arrive :)
<img width="320"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1805c525-72d1-4197-b865-6e2d6fbc8819"
/>
---------
Co-authored-by: Hocuri <hocuri@gmx.de>
the wire format is already prepared to carry information additionally to reactions,
so let the header name reflect that as well.
in practise, we might want to use a `pinned` flag very soon
in case pinned messages got resent in channels.
it makes sense if that flag goes to the message as such,
and not to an extra message.
and then it makes sense to not introduce a new things.
ftr, this is about resending state to other members,
it is not about syncing across devices for the same user.
the code as such is not changed by this PR,
it is only a wording preparation, of a header that is not even visible.
if we semantically put things other than reactions to the wire format,
we may want to move it out of `broadcast_reactions.rs`
the UIs are currently advised
to only allow the five default reactions in broadcast channels.
this PR ensures that from sending site as well as receiving site.
soon, we probably want to make the possible reactions configurable, this
PR is mainly for some safety until then. once we have an API to change
default reactions, we can also easily test "invalid" reactions on the
receiving side; currently only sending is tested
successor of https://github.com/chatmail/core/pull/8450
---------
Co-authored-by: Jagoda Estera Ślązak <128227338+j-g00da@users.noreply.github.com>
this PR adds support for reactions in broadcast channels.
> the idea of broadcast reactions is that they are sent as usual from
subscribers to owner. after some time, the owner broadcasts them to all
subscribers, who only get to see reaction+count, not who-reacted-what
the PR is quite large, but a good share are tests and otherwise many
things are straight forward.
review should be done by-file, not by-commit. to make review easier,
here is a high-level overview:
first a change in the existing internal `Reactions` object was required.
before this PR, `Reactions` had a "contact to reaction map" only, and
the "frequencies map", that are actually mainly needed for UI, were
calculated as needed. with this PR, the "frequencies map" is the field
that always exist, the "contact map" is only available on top of that.
moreover, this PR shifts that part to the core, it was unfortunately in
the bindings before.
with that preparation things done as follows:
1. reactions from broadcast channel subscriber (`Chattype::InBroadcast`)
to broadcast channel owner (`Chattype::OutBroadcast`) are sent as usual,
only change for that step was to allow sending them at all
2. the owner receives reactions and saves them to the existing
`reactions` table as usual. additionally, the changed message is
remembered in `reactions_need_broadcast` table
3. in the IMAP loop, when ~10 minutes have passed, and
`reactions_need_broadcast` contains entries, a single, hidden message
with accumulated reactions is sent. this message may contain reactions
to different messages. for each message, all known reactions are sent as
reaction+count.
4. subscriber receive that message and save the accumulated reactions in
`reactions_broadcasted`
6. `get_message_reactions` is adapted so that `frequencies` are set
independently of who-reacted-what (the old and only field).
who-reacted-what is called `by_contact` now. it is always set for
compatibility reasons, however, it is not exhaustive for subscribers.
in general, UI should work with frequencies, the API itself, however,
has not changed.
other tweaks:
- outgoing channels are muted on creation, and UI shall allow to
unmute/mute them as all other chats. reason is that reactions are
notified, but in many cases not of large interest. this is also what
telegram is doing
- to have an intermediate feedback when reacting, the local state should
include ones own reaction, even if it is not yet broadcasted. for that,
we modify `reactions_broadcasted` using `modify_frequencies()` as needed
when sending an reaction. there are still some situations where the
update may not include ones own reaction, in this case it is added
lately by `refine_frequencies()`, so that `get_message_reactions()`
always contain SELF.
(in a first implementation, we always increased SELF reaction in
refine_frequencies(), however, that was worse and led to SELF counted
twice once the owner sent broadcast)
<details>
<summary>wire format</summary>
wire format is a JSON in the `Broadcast-Reactions:` header.
additionally, `Content-Disposition: reaction` is set to not show the
hidden message on existing devices.
using a header also allows us to broadcast reactions with resent channel
messages (on joining) later.
```
{
"messages": [
{
"id": "12345678",
"reactions": [
{ "emoji": "👍", "count": 4 },
{ "emoji": "🎉", "count": 2 }
]
},
{
"id": "23456789",
"reactions": []
}
]
}
```
for `id`, the wire format needs to use `rfc724_mid` as `msg_id` are
local only.
</details>
### known issues
- if the channel owner uses multiple devices, broadcasted reaction
updates are sent from each device. the updates are not that big, so that
is probably not a big deal. if it turns out that this is an issue, we
can think about fixes in another PR. might be done by restarting our
10-minute-wait once we see an update from another device
- we cannot set contact_id for DC_EVENT_REACTIONS_CHANGED - but i doubt
it was ever used
### for another pr
- ~~add `Broadcast-Reactions:` header also for resent channel messages,
so that new subscriber do not only get the latest messages, but also
their reactions. for that, the `Broadcast-Reactions:` header can go to
the corresponding message, no need to send extra messages. we would need
to change the sending part to send all reactions for a given message. on
receiving part, we need to make sure, `receive_broadcast_reactions()` is
called when the message actually exist.~~
EDIT: subsequent PR for resending broadcast reactions at
https://github.com/chatmail/core/pull/8496
- add api to allow only a subset of reactions, fiter incoming reactions
before broadcasting
### misc.
ui pr: https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-ios/pull/3225 and
https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-android/pull/4560 , which both
were tested successfully with this core PR already. desktop is meant to
be done once this is merged
---------
Co-authored-by: l <link2xt@testrun.org>
This adds a test for the unencrypted headers, because
https://github.com/chatmail/core/pull/8345/ changes how these are
rendered, and so far we didn't have any tests for them.
This change separates rendering into two separate steps:
1. Rendering of the message payload without the From, Date and Autocrypt headers.
2. Adding the From, Date and Autocrypt headers and possibly encrypting the message.
The goal is to have serializable result of the first step
that can be persisted in the database and sent later with any email address.
This way it will be possible to send queued messages over any relay.
This will make it possible not to remove all messages from the queue
when the sending relay is changed.
Currently changing `configured_addr` deletes everything from `smtp` table.
This change is however only a refactoring and does not implement any features.
Otherwise users may add up to 5 relays, but 2 oldest relays
are actually ignored.
Having the maximum number of published relays
and the number of relays used the same between all clients
makes the order of relays in the key irrelevant.
We may even remove sorting by `add_timestamp`
from `get_all_self_addrs()` in the future.
