<!-- PR description-->
Introducing a new `Configurer` interface to abstract out storage config information(for s3, filesystem etc) from caller code. I consider this as a short term solution. We need to consolidate overall config handling in a better way, but that's out of scope for this PR chain.
Testing
* Most of the changes here are code movement under the hood. So relying on existing tests.
* I'll address any test gaps 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
- [ ] 🤖 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/1416
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
<!-- PR description-->
One of the 2 remaining setup PRs before we can introduce local storage repos.
**Changes:**
1. Read storage provider(`provider`) from config file except for `repo init * ` or `repo connect *` commands.
2. Apply flag overrides based on provider type( e.g. `S3FlagOverrides` if provider is `S3`)
3. Propagate storage provider type to functions which read/write config. These functions arbitrate on config hierarchy - flags, env, config file, in that order.
**Reasons**
* Reason 1 is needed is because config file is the source of truth for storage provider for all commands except `repo init` or `repo connect`. In the exception cases, we pick the provider in command (e.g. `s3`) as the source of truth. e.g. consider a `repo init s3`, followed by `repo init filesystem`.During `repo init filesystem`, config file would indicate `S3` provider, but the correct behavior here is to select `filesystem` provider.
* One alternative was to push provider from the init/connect cmds into an override flag, and let the config code decide on hierarchy. However, this felt hacky. provider here is not a flag to begin with. It's part of init/connect commands.
---
#### 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/1416
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [ ] ⚡ 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
- [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. -->
* closes https://github.com/alcionai/corso/issues/3990
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [ ] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 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-->
---
#### 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. -->
* #3990
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
This was somehow sliced out of changes persisted
in prior branch merges. It re-adds persisting replies as part of message content retrieval.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🐛 Bugfix
#### Issue(s)
* #3989
#### Test Plan
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
Allows lookup of groups using their display name in addition to their ID.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🌻 Feature
#### 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: --->
- [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
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
<!-- PR description-->
One of the setup PRs before introducing local storage support for corso.
Changes
1. Export `storage.storageProvider` and rename it to `storage.Provider`. Without the rename, linter errors out with `exported: type name will be used as storage.StorageProvider by other packages, and that stutters; consider calling this Provider`
2. Rerun stringer - `stringer -type=Provider -linecomment`
3. Introduce a new Provider - `FS` for filesystem. This is in line with kopia naming for local/network attached storage.
4. Fix hardcoded string values for storage providers in test code.
---
#### 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
similar to exchange, there are conditions under
which channel messages are unable to use the
delta api. In particular, when the channel has no valid email property. This change ensures that
we enumerate the entire channel under those
conditions, instead of failing out.
Technically, the only situation we know of where
the email property is missing, and thus the channel cannot make delta queries, is when there are
zero messages in the channel already. However,
there may be unknown cases that we haven't caught, so instead of skipping the channel we're going to
handle non-delta enumeration for future safeguarding.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🐛 Bugfix
#### Issue(s)
* #3989
#### Test Plan
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 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-->
Handle-
- empty channel
- do to add item if deleted
#### 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
- [ ] ⚡ Unit test
fix up the following bugs:
* reinstate previousPath in the metadata retrieval
* implement DoNotMergeItems for real
* nil pointer protection for the 'from' property
* some additional logging
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🐛 Bugfix
#### Issue(s)
* #3989
#### Test Plan
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 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
Adds the owner category to the minified site struct in the m365 service api. Instead of generating a "SiteByID" func in that layer, the ParseSite func is exported, which allows the user to provide an existing siteable
interface for transformation.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🌻 Feature
#### 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
- [ ] 🤖 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
- [x] ⚡ 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
extends the site get-by-id call to include drive info. Useful for detecting whether the site is owned by
a user, or a group or team.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🌻 Feature
#### Test Plan
- [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
info.itemType already looks through each service entry to find the item type. A service nil check is redundant. Adds a qol func for asking if an itemInfo is a driveish item.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🐛 Bugfix
#### Issue(s)
* #3990
#### Test Plan
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
A bunch of places where we missed handling groups
<!-- 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
- [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
<!-- 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
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🌻 Feature
#### Issue(s)
* #3989
#### Test Plan
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
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
Bumps [github.com/microsoftgraph/msgraph-sdk-go](https://github.com/microsoftgraph/msgraph-sdk-go) from 1.16.0 to 1.17.0.
<details>
<summary>Changelog</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a href="https://github.com/microsoftgraph/msgraph-sdk-go/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md">github.com/microsoftgraph/msgraph-sdk-go's changelog</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h2>[1.17.0]- 2023-08-30</h2>
<h3>Changed</h3>
<ul>
<li>Weekly generation.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li><a href="bd9689c25d"><code>bd9689c</code></a> Generated models and request builders (<a href="https://redirect.github.com/microsoftgraph/msgraph-sdk-go/issues/563">#563</a>)</li>
<li>See full diff in <a href="https://github.com/microsoftgraph/msgraph-sdk-go/compare/v1.16.0...v1.17.0">compare view</a></li>
</ul>
</details>
<br />
[](https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-security-vulnerabilities/about-dependabot-security-updates#about-compatibility-scores)
You can trigger a rebase of this PR by commenting `@dependabot rebase`.
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-start)
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-end)
---
<details>
<summary>Dependabot commands and options</summary>
<br />
You can trigger Dependabot actions by commenting on this PR:
- `@dependabot rebase` will rebase this PR
- `@dependabot recreate` will recreate this PR, overwriting any edits that have been made to it
- `@dependabot merge` will merge this PR after your CI passes on it
- `@dependabot squash and merge` will squash and merge this PR after your CI passes on it
- `@dependabot cancel merge` will cancel a previously requested merge and block automerging
- `@dependabot reopen` will reopen this PR if it is closed
- `@dependabot close` will close this PR and stop Dependabot recreating it. You can achieve the same result by closing it manually
- `@dependabot show <dependency name> ignore conditions` will show all of the ignore conditions of the specified dependency
- `@dependabot ignore this major version` will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this major version (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this minor version` will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this minor version (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this dependency` will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this dependency (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
</details>
<!-- 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
prepends the default contacts folder display name to the location instead of the well-known defaultContacts value. This ensures the folder gets compared properly for non-english mailboxes.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🐛 Bugfix
#### Issue(s)
* #4175
#### 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. -->
* https://github.com/alcionai/corso/issues/4154
#### Test Plan
<!-- How will this be tested prior to merging.-->
- [ ] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
adds enumerators for channels, and a delta
of channel messages.
Also updates the its struct to include group ids, and reformats some of the struct schema.
---
#### 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
Don't clobber the Quota Exceeded status once we get it
Add unit test to make sure this doesn't happen
---
#### 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
- [ ] 🌻 Feature
- [x] 🐛 Bugfix
- [ ] 🗺️ Documentation
- [ ] 🤖 Supportability/Tests
- [ ] 💻 CI/Deployment
- [ ] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Test Plan
- [ ] 💪 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
Adds groups channel message filters to group selectors. Includes scopes for message creation time, last response time, and message created by.
---
#### 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
Take an interface as the parameter for test helper functions. This allows them to be used with *testing.B (benchmark) as well as *testing.T (test).
---
#### 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
- [x] 🤖 Supportability/Tests
- [ ] 💻 CI/Deployment
- [ ] 🧹 Tech Debt/Cleanup
#### Test Plan
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [ ] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
<!-- PR description-->
Message handler implementation and other APIs to fetch channels and messages data
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
<!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: --->
- [ ] 🌻 Feature
#### 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
adds basic backup integration tests for groups in the operations testing package.
currently skipped and awaiting full v0 backup implementation.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🤖 Supportability/Tests
#### Issue(s)
* #3988
#### Test Plan
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [x] 💚 E2E
Shuffle around some logic for details merging so that
we always attempt to extract a LocationRef from the
backup base entry that's currently being examined.
A LocationRef should always be available from either
the LocationRef field in the details entry (newer
backups) or by extracting it from the RepoRef (older
backups)
Manually tested incremental backups for exchange in
the following scenarios:
1. v0.3.0 backup (calendars use IDs in RepoRef) ->
incremental with this patch -> incremental with
this patch
1. v0.2.0 backup (exchange uses folder names in
RepoRef) -> incremental with this patch ->
incremental with this patch
The above tests should cover the cases where:
* base backup details don't have LocationRef for
exchange items
* base backup details have LocationRef for exchange
items
---
#### 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#3716
#### Test Plan
- [x] 💪 Manual
- [x] ⚡ Unit test
- [ ] 💚 E2E
#### 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
Some quick tech-debt splitting up of the code in services/m365
---
#### 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
CLI changes for groups.
---
#### 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
- [ ] 💚 E2E
Adds the boilerplate for groups backup collection processing. Not necessarily functional at this time, due to missing dependencies and consts that aren't yet in the branch. Thus the lack of tests. It's just good enough to keep progress rolling forward.
---
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [x] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
- [x] 🌻 Feature
#### Issue(s)
* #3989
#### Test Plan
<!-- PR description-->
add Handlers interface for Channels.
#### Does this PR need a docs update or release note?
- [ ] ⛔ No
#### Type of change
<!--- Please check the type of change your PR introduces: --->
- [ ] 🌻 Feature
#### 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.-->
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
<!-- PR description-->
This PR optimizes memory & cache refresh time for URL cache. The cache only makes use of a small subset of drive item properties, namely ID, deleted, file, folder, content download URL. We have found that reducing the number of query properties has a sizable impact on corso mem usage. This is especially relevant for large scale backups.
See below graph for a comparison between original delta queries & mod. Note that this is with corso instrumentations to show comparisons side by side in the same run.
- Reading this graph
- We are doing 3 orig delta queries followed right after by 3 mod. Vertical lines are delta query spans.
Originally, this investigation was done to improve mem usage for scale backups. But we also found that url cache delta query time drops by 22% with this PR. This is because we are now transferring & processing fewer bytes.
---
#### 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
- [x] 💚 E2E
#### 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
