Closes#132.
Stalwart 0.16.20 accepts a synthetic id on `CalendarEvent/set`, writing a
`recurrenceOverrides` entry rather than touching the series, so editing
one date of a recurring event is now something the server does and this
does too.
Editing asks the scope *before* the form opens, because it decides which
event the form is even about: a form populated from the master shows the
series' start date, so editing Wednesday's standup would have offered to
move Monday's. Deleting asks in place of the old confirm.
The patch is narrowed rather than posted hopefully. 0.16.20 sorts
per-occurrence properties into three groups and only one is honest: ten
are refused with `invalidProperties`, twelve more are dropped from the
patch while the response still reports success, and the rest are applied.
That silent middle group is how #26 reached a live server - a successful
response is not evidence anything was written - so `occurrencePatch`
throws on the first group, reports the second to the caller, and the
editor leaves out the five it always sends. A patch that would be
entirely dropped is not sent at all.
The refusal for an occurrence of a this-and-future change offers the
series instead of a bare error toast. Nothing here writes one of those,
but an event synced from another client can carry one.
Two things the scope prompt cost, both worth knowing. A dialog is queued
in a store the moment it is asked for, so it outlives the effect that
asked: without a ref guard a remount queues a second prompt the first
answer cannot retract. And gating the *answer* on the effect's cleanup
flag is worse - StrictMode runs mount, cleanup, mount, so the flag is
already set by the time anyone clicks and the editor never opens.
The mock expands recurrences for the first time, which is what makes any
of this developable. It hands out synthetic ids for everything including
one-offs, gives occurrences a `recurrenceId` and no rule, and reproduces
the refusals - including the silent drops, since a mock that applied them
would let a client that sends them look correct everywhere but a real
server.
Closes#133.
`updateEvent`, `destroyEvent` and `rsvp` took an id and sent it. The
`baseEventId ?? id` that made them hit the series lived at four call
sites instead, and every one of them happened to be right.
That was backstopped by the server until now. Through 0.16.19 a synthetic
id reaching `destroy` came back as "Deleting synthetic ids is not yet
supported" and the user saw a toast. 0.16.20 accepts it and removes one
date instead, reporting success under a dialog that said "Delete all
occurrences?" - so a forgotten `??` became silent data loss rather than
an error.
The three methods now take the event and a required `scope`, and there is
exactly one place that turns an event into an id. A caller that wants the
series cannot get an occurrence by forgetting anything; a caller that
wants one occurrence has to say so.
`rsvp` takes the event rather than an id for the same reason, and no
longer looks it up: its patch is `participants/{key}/participationStatus`,
which is one of the pointers 0.16.20 *allows* on an occurrence, so aimed
at an instance it would quietly mean "only that day".
`findByUid` says in a comment that its query omits `expandRecurrences` on
purpose, since InviteCard hands the result straight to `destroyEvent`.
Guests added to an event vanished on save and no invitation was ever
sent. Not a guard in the editor, and nothing the server complained
about: ihasmail addresses a participant the way RFC 8984 does, with
sendTo and email, and Stalwart 0.16 keeps that address under
calendarAddress. Handed the RFC's spelling it stores the event, drops
the entire participant map, and reports success. Six shapes were tried
against a live 0.16.19, down to sendTo and roles alone; all six were
dropped, and patching a participant onto an existing event fails
outright with "Patch operation failed".
The same disagreement runs through two more properties. The organizer is
organizerCalendarAddress, not replyTo. A recurrence is a single
recurrenceRule, not a recurrenceRules array — and that one Stalwart
refuses honestly, with invalidProperties, so no recurring event could be
created at all and existing ones showed no repeat.
So writes now use Stalwart's names and reads accept either, since a
mailbox may hold events written by other clients. The mock now refuses
what the real server refuses and drops what it drops: advertising the
RFC spelling is exactly how this reached a live server unnoticed, the
same way the capability-placement bug did.
Verified against 0.16.19: participants, organizer and rule all survive a
create, an update and a re-read, with the roles kept as sent.
Fixes#26Fixes#30
A one-time event opened for editing said "this is a recurring event —
changes apply to the whole series", and deleting one offered to delete
all occurrences of an event that has exactly one.
Three places asked whether an event had a baseEventId and took that for
recurrence. It isn't: the calendar loads its range with expandRecurrences,
and Stalwart puts a baseEventId on everything it returns that way, a
one-off pointing at itself included. The mock never sets the field at
all, which is why this only showed up against a real server.
They now share isRecurring(), which asks about recurrence rules, and
treats a base that is some other event as an occurrence of a series too
— so an expanded instance that travels without its rules is still
described honestly on the way to being deleted.
Fixes#25
jcoffey-dev