Closed Bug 1273171 Opened 5 years ago Closed 5 years ago

Add some missing members to imIncomingServer class.


(Thunderbird :: Instant Messaging, defect)

Not set


(Not tracked)

Thunderbird 49.0


(Reporter: alta88, Assigned: alta88)



(1 file, 2 obsolete files)

No description provided.
Can you please provide a longer description about what this bug fixes? Thanks.
For completeness, imIncomingServer should have these 2 properties. It may not throw in the current usage, but does on a custom folderpane implementation I'm doing.

Btw, the im js incomingServer implementation is a great model; why it's not being used in favor of more c++ xpcom deadwood (seriously, worrying about gc for custom accounts ??) is a mystery.
Attachment #8752880 - Flags: review?(clokep)
(In reply to Patrick Cloke [:clokep] from comment #1)
> Can you please provide a longer description about what this bug fixes?
> Thanks.

That was so fast I hadn't yet attached the patch to the placeholder bug ;)
Comment on attachment 8752880 [details] [diff] [review]
Add some missing members to imIncomingServer class

Review of attachment 8752880 [details] [diff] [review]:

Looks good to me. Can you change the commit message to say "imIncomingServer's nsIMsgFolder implementation" instead of "imIncomingServer class"?

::: mail/components/im/imIncomingServer.js
@@ +249,5 @@
>        get subFolders() { return EmptyEnumerator; },
>        getStringProperty: aPropertyName => "",
>        getNumUnread: aDeep => 0,
>        Shutdown: function() {},
> +      get URI() { return this.server.serverURI; },

nit: I would move this getter to be right before "get prettyName()" so that the order here is more consistent with the order in the nsIMsgFolder.idl file.
Attachment #8752880 - Flags: review?(clokep) → review+
Attached patch imIncomingServer.patch (obsolete) — Splinter Review
thanks, udpated for comment.
Assignee: nobody → alta88
Attachment #8752880 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8752895 - Flags: review+
Keywords: checkin-needed
I was going to check this is, but why is the author (User) in the patch named as aleth? Shouldn't it be alta88?
Attachment #8753058 - Flags: review+
no idea how that happened, but the 2nd one is correct.
Attachment #8752895 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Closed: 5 years ago
Keywords: checkin-needed
OS: Unspecified → All
Hardware: Unspecified → All
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → Thunderbird 49.0
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.