1278987 - Import also outgoing filters from Becky!

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(MailNews Core :: Import, defect)

Description

[:aceman]

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1274229 +++

The Becky! client actually supports also outgoing filters, which we do not support yet. They are stored in a separate file:
IFilter.def : Filter for incoming mail
OFilter.def : Filter for outgoing mail

Comment 1

[:aceman]

(In reply to :aceman from comment #0)
> The Becky! client actually supports also outgoing filters, which we do not
> support yet.

I mean we do not import them yet, but TB does support outgoing filters already. So we can import them too.

Comment 2

[:aceman]

Attachment: patch

Try run:
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try-comm-central&revision=ec99dfc7eb4151ae9b3ad8892ac7d791c18b8160 . In the run the becky tests fail on Linux and Mac, because I enabled them there, but the importer is not compiled on those platforms.

Comment 3

[Kent James (:rkent)]

How can I test this? I know nothing of Becky! I only really did an rs+ on the previous patch. Could someone who uses Becky! try this or comment, or better yet give feedback on the code details?

Comment 4

[:aceman]

Comment on attachment 8762167 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

A Japanese user has sent me a sample OFilter.def file and also the folder structure, which implies both IFilter and OFilter are in the same directory and are of the same format.

The original code supported that when mLocation pointed to a file, that one was imported as incoming filters. I keep that, but also expand that if mLocation is a directory, we try to import both IFilter and OFilter if it is found inside. I think that can be checked also without knowing Becky (which I also do not have installed and do not know). But I can ask mkato to look at that part.

But I will still need you to see the changes in tests and the import test infrastructure (adding FiltersImportHelper).

Comment 5

[Kent James (:rkent)]

Comment on attachment 8762167 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

Review of attachment 8762167 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

With the r+ from m_kato, and the limited other options for getting this reviewed, I read through this once and did not find anything objectionable, but did not try to test it or fully understand the issues. I think we are best served by moving forward with this and landing it for more testing, so rs=me.

Comment 6

[:aceman]

Thanks.
https://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/284ca6dc2a7243559b54922aea3e432e5a2f4368