Two things, one of them not what it looked like.
An organizer fixture was built from a real, routable address. Every other
fixture in the codebase uses example.org or example.com, and this
repository is public, so that one was a personal address sitting in
public source for no reason -- the test asserts roles and participation
status and never reads either value. It is [email protected] now.
The names were wrong in the other direction. Three fixtures across two
files said "John Ellis", which is not the maintainer's name; it is
John Coffey. Being a name rather than a routable address, it leaked
nothing, but it was simply incorrect, and incorrect in the sort of place
nobody rereads.
The address and the name are separate questions and got separate answers:
the address is fictional because it is an address, and the name is real
because it is right. A message from [email protected] signed John Coffey
is exactly what these tests mean.
Found while checking, at the maintainer's prompting, whether the repo
leaked anything about the host it runs on. It does not -- the nginx and
deploy files here are the generic examples they claim to be, and the real
ones live in a private repository.
One test built its organizer from a real, routable address and a real
name. Every other fixture in the codebase uses example.org or
example.com, and this repository is public, so the odd one out was a
personal address sitting in public source for no reason -- the test
asserts roles and participation status and never looks at either value.
Now [email protected], matching what the rest of the tests already use.
Found while checking, at the maintainer's prompting, whether the repo
leaked anything about the host it runs on. It does not: the nginx and
deploy files here are the generic examples they claim to be, and the real
ones live in a private repository. This was the only thing the search
turned up that was worth changing.
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
jcoffey-dev