adds item type comparisons to the info filter during groups selector reduction. This ensures cross-
contamination of item types on shared info properties does not occur.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🐛 Bugfix
#### Issue(s)
* #3988
#### Test Plan
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
Delay getting ItemInfo when uploading
data a tad longer. Also add additional
checks that the modTime we use is what
we expect later on.
Delaying getting ItemInfo will help
for Exchange lazy readers by resolving
a circular dependency we had between
adding the ItemInfo to the cache set
and getting the item data
The extra modTime check will at least
let us know if something unexpected
happens that would affect incremental
details merging later on
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ✅ Yes, it's included
- [ ] 🕐 Yes, but in a later PR
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🌻 Feature
- [ ] 🐛 Bugfix
- [ ] 🗺️ Documentation
- [ ] 🤖 Supportability/Tests
- [ ] 💻 CI/Deployment
- [ ] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Issue(s)
* #2023
#### Test Plan
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
Not sure if we wanna merge it as it might generate way too many conflicts, but this should help us add a linter in CI. If we are good, I'll add something that can do lints for this in a follow up PR.
Super hacky, but this fix was created using `while true ; do tree-grepper -q go '(argument_list "," @nope .)' | tail -n1| awk -F: "{print \$1,\"+\"\$2\" -c ':norm \$xJZZ'\"}" | xargs vim ; done`.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ✅ Yes, it's included
- [ ] 🕐 Yes, but in a later PR
- [ ] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
<!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: --->
- [ ] 🌻 Feature
- [ ] 🐛 Bugfix
- [ ] 🗺️ Documentation
- [ ] 🤖 Supportability/Tests
- [ ] 💻 CI/Deployment
- [ ] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Issue(s)
<!-- Can reference multiple issues. Use one of the following "magic words" - "closes, fixes" to auto-close the Github issue. -->
* https://github.com/alcionai/corso/issues/3654
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [ ] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
<!-- PR description-->
Wires `IsServiceEnabled` code into `UserHasMailbox`, `UserHasDrive`, and `UserGetMailboxInfo` SDK APIs.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ✅ Yes, it's included
- [ ] 🕐 Yes, but in a later PR
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
<!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: --->
- [ ] 🌻 Feature
- [ ] 🐛 Bugfix
- [ ] 🗺️ Documentation
- [ ] 🤖 Supportability/Tests
- [ ] 💻 CI/Deployment
- [x] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Issue(s)
<!-- Can reference multiple issues. Use one of the following "magic words" - "closes, fixes" to auto-close the Github issue. -->
* https://github.com/alcionai/corso/issues/3844
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
<!-- PR description-->
1. Renamed `IsBackupRunnable` to `IsServiceEnabled` & extended to restore operation. Removed `checkServiceEnabled`. Reasons:
- The above 2 functions were doing the same thing. Removed `checkServiceEnabled` in favor of `IsBackupRunnable` since we want this check to be as soon as possible during backup/restore op initialization
- Renamed `IsBackupRunnable` to `IsServiceEnabled`, because a) we are only doing service enabled checks right now, b) common code that can be used for both restore & backup.
2. Wire corso code to use new helpers in internal/m365/common.go
3. Note: SDK wiring and related integ tests will be added in a follow up PR
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ✅ Yes, it's included
- [ ] 🕐 Yes, but in a later PR
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
<!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: --->
- [ ] 🌻 Feature
- [ ] 🐛 Bugfix
- [ ] 🗺️ Documentation
- [ ] 🤖 Supportability/Tests
- [ ] 💻 CI/Deployment
- [x] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Issue(s)
<!-- Can reference multiple issues. Use one of the following "magic words" - "closes, fixes" to auto-close the Github issue. -->
* https://github.com/alcionai/corso/issues/3844
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
<!-- PR description-->
Currently corso CLI & SDK have different checks for services enabled. These checks have diverged which can lead to bugs. For e.g. SDK users use [code](3e43028a88/src/pkg/services/m365/users.go (L92)) to check if OD is enabled, while corso uses [this code](https://github.com/alcionai/corso/blob/main/src/pkg/services/m365/api/users.go#L174). These funcs have different checks. This PR introduces common helpers to consolidate these checks in one place.
- Note: I decided against absorbing these helpers into api/users.go, because separation of concerns - getters shouldn't arbitrate on return vals.
- Note that this code is not yet wired up to SDK/CLI. It'll be added in a following [PR](https://github.com/alcionai/corso/pull/4096).
**Changes**
1. `Is*ServiceEnabled` helpers in internal/m365/common.go.
2. Add `GetMailboxInfo` to common code. This is currently a duplicate of code in `GetInfo`. That function will be removed once we port SDK users to `GetMailboxInfo`.
3. Unit tests for common code. Integration tests will be added in a later PR
- Note:`TestIsOneDriveServiceEnabled` is copied from `TestCheckUserHasDrives`. The older test will be removed in a later PR.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ✅ Yes, it's included
- [ ] 🕐 Yes, but in a later PR
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
<!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: --->
- [ ] 🌻 Feature
- [ ] 🐛 Bugfix
- [ ] 🗺️ Documentation
- [x] 🤖 Supportability/Tests
- [ ] 💻 CI/Deployment
- [x] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Issue(s)
<!-- Can reference multiple issues. Use one of the following "magic words" - "closes, fixes" to auto-close the Github issue. -->
* https://github.com/alcionai/corso/issues/3844
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
<!-- PR description-->
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ✅ Yes, it's included
- [ ] 🕐 Yes, but in a later PR
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
<!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: --->
- [ ] 🌻 Feature
- [ ] 🐛 Bugfix
- [ ] 🗺️ Documentation
- [ ] 🤖 Supportability/Tests
- [ ] 💻 CI/Deployment
- [x] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Issue(s)
<!-- Can reference multiple issues. Use one of the following "magic words" - "closes, fixes" to auto-close the Github issue. -->
* #<issue>
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [ ] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
A Stream is a continuous transmission of data.
An item is a single structure. Crossing the two
definitions generates confusion.
Primarily code movement/renaming. Though there
is also some reduction/replacement of structs
where we'd made a variety of testable Item implementations
instead of re-using the generic mock.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Test Plan
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
No longer required by SDK users and not exposed directly to CLI users unless they're looking at the JSON output from details. This field is not documented anywhere though so there's no guarantees that we technically need to uphold with it.
Manually tested:
* restoring from a backup that had this field
* making a fresh backup without this field when the merge base did have this field
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ✅ Yes, it's included
- [ ] 🕐 Yes, but in a later PR
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [ ] 🌻 Feature
- [ ] 🐛 Bugfix
- [ ] 🗺️ Documentation
- [ ] 🤖 Supportability/Tests
- [ ] 💻 CI/Deployment
- [x] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Issue(s)
* closes#3986
#### Test Plan
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
Only code movement, no code changes.
Moved services to `/internal/m365/services/{onedrive,sharepoint,exchange}`
Moved collections to `/internal/m365/collection/{drive,site}`
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ✅ Yes, it's included
- [ ] 🕐 Yes, but in a later PR
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
<!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: --->
- [ ] 🌻 Feature
- [ ] 🐛 Bugfix
- [ ] 🗺️ Documentation
- [ ] 🤖 Supportability/Tests
- [ ] 💻 CI/Deployment
- [x] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Issue(s)
<!-- Can reference multiple issues. Use one of the following "magic words" - "closes, fixes" to auto-close the Github issue. -->
* #<issue>
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [ ] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
