handle cases where a resource is found, but is not accessible due to being locked out by an administrator or msoft process.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ✅ Yes, it's included
#### Type of change
- [x] 🐛 Bugfix
#### Issue(s)
* #4464
#### Test Plan
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
hands the backup resource into the drive collection for the handler to use to record as the siteID
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🐛 Bugfix
#### Issue(s)
* #3988
#### Test Plan
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
This reverts commit c3f94fd7f76f377e4728c715abbb8c7846e9fb25.
The specified commit is working fine for CI and development, but contains performance
degredation (solved in a follow-up pr) that we want to avoid for the next release. This
rever is temporary, and the changes will be re-instated after release.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🤖 Supportability/Tests
#### Test Plan
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
This is necessary to fix the correctness of the backup.
---
#### 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
- [x] 🐛 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. -->
* fixes https://github.com/alcionai/corso/issues/4371
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [ ] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
I've updated the Team used in the CI to include private and shared channels. Sanity tests should ideally do the e2e tests for multi site backups.
<!-- PR description-->
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ✅ Yes, it's included
- [ ] 🕐 Yes, but in a later PR
- [ ] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
<!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: --->
- [x] 🌻 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. -->
* #<issue>
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
Leverage the generic item struct to inject
serialization format information for all
items
Unwires the old code that injected versions
in kopia wrapper but leaves some code in
the wrapper to strip out the serialization
format during restore
Future PRs should move the process of
pulling out serialization format to
individual services
Viewing by commit may make review
easier
---
#### 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)
* #4328
#### Test Plan
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
Adds a groupByID call to services, and
adds CallConfig to the group by id api fn.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🌻 Feature
#### Issue(s)
* #3988
#### Test Plan
- [x] 💚 E2E
Drive pager usage currently showcases strong coupling between two layers: drive collection logic processing and drive api. This PR separates that coupling by moving the full item enumeration process into the
API, and letting the collection logic process the
results. This acs as both a simplification of complex code, and a clearer separation of ownership between the two layers.
A detrimental side effect of this change is that drive item enumeration has moved from page-streaming
(ie: each page is fully processed before moving on to the next) and onto batch processing (ie: all items are stored in memory and processed in a single pass). Acknowledging that this is an unacceptable regression, a follow-up PR will appear shortly with better handling for stream-processing enumeration from the API layer as a standard part of the pattern for all pager
implementations.
---
#### 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
missed the root site call usage of expand drive
on the last fix.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🐛 Bugfix
#### Issue(s)
* #4337
#### Test Plan
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
<!-- PR description-->
As of now, we try to restore channel messages and fail with the following error:
```
Error: Failed to run Groups restore: running restore: restoring collections: data category not supported
```
---
#### 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
- [x] 🐛 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. -->
* #<issue>
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
`Libraries` is what gets used for SP libraries and using `channelMessages` here did not look good.
Ref: fe77c30e84/src/internal/m365/service/sharepoint/export.go (L49-L52)
---
#### 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.-->
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [ ] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
<!-- PR description-->
Ideally goes in after https://github.com/alcionai/corso/pull/4257 .
We could merge this instead of https://github.com/alcionai/corso/pull/4258 but I thought we could skip for now as this as been tested much less. But outside of me being paranoid, I think this should be in a good shape.
If this do go in, we can update the CHANGELOG entry to say that we do support export for SP libs.
This will also need more e2e(sanity) tests which I'll add in a follow up PR.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ✅ Yes, it's included
- [x] 🕐 Yes, but in a later PR
- [ ] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
<!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: --->
- [x] 🌻 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. -->
* closes https://github.com/alcionai/corso/issues/4259
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Issue(s)
* #3988
#### Test Plan
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ✅ Yes, it's included
#### Type of change
- [x] 🐛 Bugfix
#### Issue(s)
* #3988
#### Test Plan
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 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
- [x] 🤖 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. -->
* #<issue>
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
reduces channel message export data to the minimal set of valuable info: message content, creator,
creation and modification time, and replies (each
reply has the same data, sans other replies).
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🌻 Feature
#### Issue(s)
* #3991
#### Test Plan
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [x] 💚 E2E
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
<!-- PR description-->
Handle the path creation for Onedrive and Channel.
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
<!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: --->
- [ ] 🐛 Bugfix
#### 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
We currently don't have support for SP export in groups. Do not try to do them.
---
#### 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
- [x] 🐛 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. -->
* #<issue>
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [ ] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
Still a few pending items like CLI handling and restoring specific items. Will be handled in a follow up.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ✅ Yes, it's included
- [x] 🕐 Yes, but in a later PR
- [ ] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
<!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: --->
- [x] 🌻 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/3992
#### 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: --->
- [x] 🌻 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/3990
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
various tidbits of data cleanup before moving forward with adding export behavior to groups.
* move duplicate collections mocks into data/mock
* move the export collection struct into pkg/export (to prevent future duplicates in the next PR)
* rename export.Collection to Collectioner, because it's an interface.
* some other non-logic rearrangement
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Issue(s)
* #3991
#### Test Plan
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
updaing the path package to the current naming convention. No logic changes.
---
#### 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
<!-- 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
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
Security groups will not have an associated site. This avoids trying
to backup the site if we get an error that the site is not available.
---
#### 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/3990
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [ ] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
enables nightly cli e2e tests, operations layer integration tests, and sanity tests for groups and teams.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🤖 Supportability/Tests
#### Issue(s)
* #3989
#### Test Plan
- [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
just a QoL shorthand to match the Build func.
---
#### 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
Add sites metadata (previous paths) under `groupID/libraries/sites/previouspath`.
<!-- 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: --->
- [x] 🌻 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. -->
* #<issue>
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 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
This is the first in a series of PRs to get v0 backups working for channels. In this change, the current api enumerators get plugged into the collections handler to produce backup data. Follow-up PRs will:
* hook backup to the CLI
* swap full-item enumeration for id-first-get-later pattern
* populate each message with all its replies on the get-later
* turn on integration testing at the operations and ci layers
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🌻 Feature
#### Issue(s)
* #3989
#### Test Plan
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 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
This adds a `MetadataPathPrefix` func to any drive related handlers. And in case of exchange, we will create a path. These generated paths, in both scenario is what now gets passed to `MakeMetadataCollection` instead of passing the different values.
<!-- 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. -->
* https://github.com/alcionai/corso/issues/4154
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 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. -->
* https://github.com/alcionai/corso/issues/4154
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
As of now we only export SP libraries, but in future we will have to export lists and pages. This ensure that we can accommodate them later.
<!-- PR description-->
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ✅ 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
- [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.-->
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
We have multitple different pager interfaces that all utilize the same (effective) set of functions. This change reduces those to two different interfaces: a delta- and non-delta- pair of pagers.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Issue(s)
* #3989
#### Test Plan
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
Previously if we had multiple SharePoint document libs, we would have merged the contents of both in the export. This separates it by document lib.
After:
- DocumentLibA/FileA
- DocumentLibB/FileB
Before:
- FileA
- FileB
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ✅ Yes, it's included
- [ ] 🕐 Yes, but in a later PR
- [ ] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
<!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: --->
- [ ] 🌻 Feature
- [x] 🐛 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. -->
* #<issue>
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
https://github.com/alcionai/corso/pull/4030#discussion_r1296246853
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ✅ Yes, it's included
- [x] 🕐 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
- [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/3990
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [ ] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
This commit has the initial rough set of changes needed to create collections from the group's default SharePoint site.
This still does not have all the functionality that we need, but the idea was that we could get this in and iterate over time.
<!-- PR description-->
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ✅ Yes, it's included
- [x] 🕐 Yes, but in a later PR
- [ ] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
<!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: --->
- [x] 🌻 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/3990
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
I've needed to catch gotchas that arise from contributors adding a value in the middle of an iota list, not to mention have dealt with prior bugs that happened the same way, now too many times to feel safe about its usage.
This PR removes the use of iota from all const declarations. The intent is to not allow the use of iota within the codebase.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Issue(s)
* #3993
#### Test Plan
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 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
small cleanup in paths, primarily splitting files
so that file contents are more clearly owned, which should be a little better for readability and code placement.
Also renames `ServicePrefix` to `BuildPrefix` in
anticipation of multi-service prefixes.
no logic changes, just movement/renaming.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Issue(s)
* #3993
#### Test Plan
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 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
