Unpublished relays aren't shown in the list of relays anymore, and can't
be deleted manually. Therefore, we want to automatically delete them in
order to make space for more relays when the limit (5) is reached and
the user wants to add another relay.
Automatically remove relays that are hidden (`is_published=0`) and
haven't been used to receive new messages for over 90 days.
Closes: #8384
Signed-off-by: Jagoda Ślązak <jslazak@jslazak.com>
BREAKING CHANGE: UIs should use `list_transports()` rather than `list_transports_ex()`, because unpublished transports count as removed from the user point of view, and should not be shown in the relay list anymore.
Alternative to https://github.com/chatmail/core/pull/8355/, fixes
https://github.com/chatmail/core/issues/8329
This fixes the following bug:
Scanning QR for existing contact doesn't update relay list
Two chat partners suddenly lost connectivity to all of their relays. They added another relay, which is accessible, and set it as main. Of course, they still couldn't communicate, because there was no way to announce a new relay list to each other (clients know only about old relays so they try to send updates there).
That's why the friends used a different channel (e.g. met IRL) to send their QR codes once again.
Expected behavior: They would expect that clients update their relay lists according to the contact info inside the QR codes, and they can continue talking in Delta.
Actual behavior: But Delta Chat client doesn't update a list of announced relays on scanning a QR in case a contact already exists. It simply opens the existing chat without altering any contact info.
---------
Co-authored-by: holger krekel <holger@merlinux.eu>
Fix https://github.com/chatmail/core/issues/8250. Not sure why anyone
would tamper with the link, but maybe the name gets ellipsized because
it is very long, or maybe we decide to ellipsize more aggressively in
the future.
The fix is easy enough, just set the GroupNameTimestamp when creating
the channel, so that `HeaderDef::ChatGroupNameTimestamp` gets set when
sending a message and the logic in
`apply_chat_name_avatar_and_description_changes()` recognizes the
incoming name's timestamp as newer than `chat_group_name_timestamp`
(which is 0 right after joining a chat).
The test is somewhat hacky and depends on the title being the last
parameter in the invite code URL, but this is fine; if we ever change
that, then the test will fail and we need to modify it.
This also removes some wrong doc comments.
Since groups are unpromoted until sending a first message, the same fix isn't needed for groups.
Fix https://github.com/chatmail/core/issues/8195
Supersedes https://github.com/chatmail/core/pull/8217
The most interesting change is in `delete_expired_imap_messages()`
because there, messages are marked for deletion on single-device
chatmail profiles.
The logic in `delete_expired_imap_messages()` was wrong before, and
pre-messages were not deleted at all. This is fixed by also querying
`pre_rfc724_mid` in addition to `rfc724_mid` from the `msgs` table.
In order not to make the SQL statement too complex, I split it into two.
WRT tests:
- `test_immediate_autodelete()` tests the auto-deletion;
`test_imap_autodelete_fully_downloaded_msg()` tests that even for a
message that is split into pre- and post-message, both messages are
deleted.
- A lot of tests test that if bcc_self is on, messages are not
auto-deleted. E.g. `test_one_account_send_bcc_setting()` and
`test_markseen_message_and_mdn()` relies on the fact that messages stay
on the server when bcc_self is on.
- Unfortunately, it is not possible to test that messages are only
deleted for chatmail servers, because we don't have any tests that use a
non-chatmail server.
Currently, the Fingerprint type implements Display, but this doesn't get
you the canonical fingerprint representation, but something
human-readable. This is confusing, and back when I first used
`Fingerprint`, I immediately wrote a bug because of this. So, instead,
make a function `human_readable()` on Fingerprint.
This comes from the discussion at
https://github.com/chatmail/core/pull/8174#discussion_r3143130722.
E.g. rename location::is_sending_locations_to_chat to location::is_sending_to_chat.
Then import only the location module and use it with location:: prefix,
similarly to how e.g. std::fs or std::tokio::fs avoids using "fs" or "file"
in function names.
Remove unused info_only option from `get_chat_msgs_ex()`.
This option was meant to show an "audit log" of a group, i.e. only the
info messages. This feature was removed again from Desktop, but the
option still lingered around in Core.
This also adds a doc comment to the JsonRPC functions, because I
wanted to note somewhere that the parameter is deprecated, and I needed
some place to put this note.
This causes problems for Delta Chat Desktop at
<https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-desktop/pull/6278>
even though the logic was originally introduced for iOS.
If the problem remains on iOS,
heuristics can be added into iOS UI.
After talking with r10s:
For spring cleaning, remove the largely-unused things that can be done a
bit.
Most private messengers (WhatsApp/Signal/...) do not have this feature,
and we do not want to become Matrix where every client has different,
partly-incompatible features.
I used some AI to draft a first version of this, and then reworked it.
This is one of multiple possibilities to fix
https://github.com/chatmail/core/issues/8041: For bots, the IncomingMsg
event is not emitted when the pre-message arrives, only when the
post-message arrives. Also, post-messages are downloaded immediately,
not after all the small messages are downloaded.
The `get_next_msgs()` API is deprecated. Instead, bots need to listen to
the IncomingMsg event in order to be notified about new events. Is this
acceptable for bots?
THE PROBLEM THAT WAS SOLVED BY THIS:
With pre-messages, it's hard for bots to wait for the message to be fully downloaded and then process it.
Up until now, bots used get_next_msgs() to query the unprocessed messages, then set last_msg_id after processing a message to that they won't process it again.
But this will now also return messages that were not fully downloaded.
ALTERNATIVES:
In the following, I will explain
the alternatives, and for why it's not so easy to just make the
`get_next_msgs()` API work. If it's not understandable, I'm happy to
elaborate more.
Core can't just completely ignore the pre-message for two reasons:
- If a post-message containing a Webxdc arrives later, and some webxdc updates arrive in the meantime, then these updates will be lost.
- The post-message doesn't contain the text (reasoning was to avoid duplicate text for people who didn't upgrade yet during the 2.43.0 rollout)
There are multiple solutions:
- Add the message as hidden in the database when the pre-message arrives.
- When the post-message arrives and we want to make it available for bots, we need to update the msg_id because of how the `get_next_msgs()` API works. This means that we need to update all webxdc updates that reference this msg_id.
- Alternatively, we could make webxdc's reference the rfc724_mid instead of the msg_id, so that we don't need stable msg_ids anymore
- Alternatively, we could deprecate `get_next_msgs()`, and ask bots to use plain events for message processing again. It's not that bad; worst case, the bot crashes and then forgets to react to some messages, but the user will just try again. And if some message makes the bot crash, then it might actually be good not to try and process it again.
- Store the pre-message text and `PostMsgMetadata` (or alternatively, the whole mime) in a new database table. Wait with processing it until the post-message arrives.
Additionally, the logic that small messages are downloaded before post-messages should be disabled for bots, in order to prevent reordering.
Follow-up to https://github.com/chatmail/core/pull/7994/, in order to
prevent clashes with other things that are called `Transport`, and in
order to make the struct name more greppable
Closes https://github.com/chatmail/core/issues/7980.
Unpublished transports are not advertised to contacts, and self-sent messages are not sent there, so that we don't cause extra messages to the corresponding inbox, but can still receive messages from contacts who don't know the new relay addresses yet.
- This adds `list_transports_ex()` and `set_transport_unpublished()` JsonRPC functions
- By default, transports are published, but when updating, all existing transports except for the primary one become unpublished in order not to break existing users that followed https://delta.chat/legacy-move
- It is not possible to unpublish the primary transport, and setting a transport as primary automatically sets it to published
An alternative would be to change the existing list_transports API rather than adding a new one list_transports_ex. But to be honest, I don't mind the _ex prefix that much, and I am wary about compatibility issues. But maybe it would be fine; see b08ba4bb8 for how this would look.
