Summary:
Different clients can have different policies for retrying after
timeouts.
Test Plan: Run locally, run tests
Reviewers: evan, spang, juan
Reviewed By: juan
Differential Revision: https://phab.nylas.com/D4247
Arc land messed up and landed a not fully merged branch. (Seriously – I
had merged a copy of my branch with master to see how easy it would be.
Because I didn't want to merge the whole thing, I blindly committed my
changes and switched back to my real branch). To my great surprise, arc
decided to use the wrong branch when landing it.
Original commit message:
Summary:
Finally, here it is! Send later, with support for open tracking but
without support for attachments yet. It took me some time to find the
right way to do things.
**The send later dilemna**
There's two ways we could handle send later:
1. do everything on the client
2. process the message in the cloud
1. is very tempting because it would make the cloud server very
simple. Unfortunately, it has some serious limitations, for example,
setting the "Date" message header. That's why I chose to go with 2. When
a user presses the "Send Later" button, we save the open/link tracking
metadata and fills in all the required fields. I added a custom endpoint
to the K2 API to do this, `/drafts/build`. After that, we save the JSON
contents of the message as metadata.
When we process metadata, we simply create a MIME message from the
JSON and send it.
**Limitations**
Right now, send later doesn't support and attachments. There's also
some minor code duplication which needs to be refactored away.
Test Plan: Tested manually. Checked that regular send still worked, too.
Reviewers: mark, spang, halla, juan, evan
Reviewed By: evan
Differential Revision: https://phab.nylas.com/D4054
Summary:
Finally, here it is! Send later, with support for open tracking but without support for attachments yet. It took me some time to find the right way to do things.
**The send later dilemna**
There's two ways we could handle send later:
1. do everything on the client
2. process the message in the cloud
1. is very tempting because it would make the cloud server very simple. Unfortunately, it has some serious limitations, for example, setting the "Date" message header. That's why I chose to go with 2. When a user presses the "Send Later" button, we save the open/link tracking metadata and fills in all the required fields. I added a custom endpoint to the K2 API to do this, `/drafts/build`. After that, we save the JSON contents of the message as metadata.
When we process metadata, we simply create a MIME message from the JSON and send it.
**Limitations**
Right now, send later doesn't support and attachments. There's also some minor code duplication which needs to be refactored away.
Test Plan: Tested manually. Checked that regular send still worked, too.
Reviewers: mark, spang, halla, juan, evan
Reviewed By: evan
Differential Revision: https://phab.nylas.com/D4054
Summary:
Isomorphic-core should be functional outside of the client environment
Depends on D4056
Test Plan: Run the test suite
Reviewers: evan, spang, juan
Reviewed By: spang, juan
Differential Revision: https://phab.nylas.com/D4062
Summary:
Move the base Jasmine spec runner into isomorphic-core to prevent
code duplication. Jasmine will look for the config file relative to
the directory it's being run in though, so we need to symlink the
config file into each package that will need it.
Test Plan: Run tests once the suites are integrated
Reviewers: evan, spang, juan
Reviewed By: spang, juan
Differential Revision: https://phab.nylas.com/D4056
Summary:
Convert the isomorphic-core specs to Jasmine 1 and symlink them into
client-app/internal_packages so they are run as part of the client
test suite.
Test Plan: Ran the suite with fdescribes in iso-core to ensure they were being called properly
Reviewers: evan, spang, juan
Reviewed By: spang, juan
Differential Revision: https://phab.nylas.com/D4055
Summary:
Prior to this diff it was easy for us to create too many IMAP connections (e.g.
by requesting many attachments at once), causing random failures when the
server would reject our connection attempts. This diff adds a per-Account IMAP
pooling mechanism so that we avoid these failures.
Test Plan:
Run locally with sync worker and several other clients using the
pool, verify correct behavior. Also added a few unit tests.
Reviewers: evan, spang, juan
Reviewed By: juan
Differential Revision: https://phab.nylas.com/D3965
