View Issue Details
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0003368||SOGo||Backend Calendar||public||2015-10-15 12:21||2018-04-27 06:09|
|Platform||[Server] Linux||OS||Debian||OS Version||8 (Jessie)|
|Target Version||Fixed in Version||3.2.5|
|Summary||0003368: Adding event to shared calendar does not necessarily send invitations|
|Description||If a user creates an event with invitees in a shared calendar they have permission to access but do not own using a CalDAV connected device, SOGo may not send emails to the invitees, depending on the device.|
iOS 9, Android via DMFS CalDAV Sync, Mozilla Lightning: No email sent.
Mac OS 10.10.1: Email sent.
I have reports that a Blackberry device works. I am checking this.
If the event is created via the web interface, email is sent.
|Steps To Reproduce||Given regular SOGo accounts sogo1, sogo2 and sogo3.|
As sogo1, share personal calendar with sogo2 and sogo3, giving them write access.
Using the web interface as sogo2, create an event in sogo1's shared calendar and invite sogo3. Verify that invitation email is sent to sogo3.
Access SOGo as sogo2 using an iOS device. Create an event in sogo1's shared calendar and invite sogo3. Verify that invitation email is *not* sent to sogo3.
|Additional Information||After examining the .ics sent by the above devices, it looks like a Mac works because it sets the ORGANIZER to be the *owner* of the shared calendar, sogo1. iOS, Android and Lightning set the ORGANIZER to be the arranger of the meeting, sogo2.|
The web interface sets the ORGANIZER to be the calendar owner sogo1, but adds a SENT-BY clause specifying the arranger, sogo2.
A quick read of RFC2445 suggests that, strictly speaking, the web interface may have the balance of right on its side. In which case all the above clients are wrong...
|Tags||calendar, Shared, thunderbird|
Samples.txt (1,849 bytes)
BEGIN:VCALENDAR PRODID:-//Apple Inc.//Mac OS X 10.10.1//EN VERSION:2.0 CALSCALE:GREGORIAN BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Europe/London BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=3;BYDAY=-1SU DTSTART:19810329T010000 TZNAME:BST TZOFFSETTO:+0100 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=10;BYDAY=-1SU DTSTART:19961027T020000 TZNAME:GMT TZOFFSETTO:+0000 END:STANDARD END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT CREATED:20151015T145903Z UID:1180E793-CA89-4CC1-A809-CB44D6EE8142 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20151016T184500 TRANSP:OPAQUE SUMMARY:Mac test shared DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20151016T174500 DTSTAMP:20151015T145903Z ORGANIZER;CN=EXAMPLE common resources:mailto:email@example.com SEQUENCE:0 ATTENDEE;RSVP=TRUE;EMAILfirstname.lastname@example.org;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;CN=Test Use r;CUTYPE=INDIVIDUAL:mailto:email@example.com CLASS:PUBLIC END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR BEGIN:VCALENDAR PRODID:-//dmfs.org//mimedir.icalendar//EN VERSION:2.0 BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Europe/London X-LIC-LOCATION:Europe/London BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:BST DTSTART:19700329T010000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=3;BYDAY=-1SU END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0000 TZNAME:GMT DTSTART:19701025T020000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=10;BYDAY=-1SU END:STANDARD END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20151016T180000 SUMMARY:Test Android - shared TRANSP:OPAQUE STATUS:CONFIRMED DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20151016T190000 LAST-MODIFIED:20151015T102835Z DTSTAMP:20151015T102835Z ORGANIZER;CN=Jim Hague:mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org CREATED:20151015T102835Z UID:5a66e305-6fb0-47f0-9759-5c6c34e75cbf.1444904915272 ATTENDEE;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;RSVP=TRUE:mailto:test@l aicatc.com CLASS:PUBLIC END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR
Samples.txt (1,849 bytes)
I can confirm this issue.
I'm going nuts to search why some does not receive invitation. Now I know. :(
|Did you report bug to Mozilla?|
|Submited bug to mozilla: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1221918|
I have not reported this as a bug myself anywhere, because I am in no way an expert on RFC2445, and I'm not at all confident that SOGo's behaviour is in fact correct. I didn't have any proper time to read RFC2445 at the time, and I have just discovered that it's obsoleted by RFC5545.
In fact, I think the Mac behaviour is wrong. RFC5545, p111, states clearly that ORGANIZER must be the meeting organiser. SENT-BY can be used to specify that someone else acting on behalf of the organiser (e.g. a secretary), but responses should still be sent to the organiser.
In the case of someone creating a meeting in a shared calendar, I think the question is the intent. Are they the organiser, or is the owner of the calendar of the calendar the organiser? That's a user context question; there is no definitive answer. At the very least, a Mac should set SENT-BY. And I now feel that iOD, Android and Lightning have a strong argument that they are right.
Regardless of what a standards lawyer would say, there remains the practical question of making SOGo work as the majority of users expect. Which probably boils down to 'what does Outlook/Exchange do in this circumstance'? I don't know the answer to that question.
We hit this problem because we're a small organisation using a single calendar as global 'who is where' resource. This usage cannot scale, so probably shouldn't be catered for as the default way of SOGo working. I suspect that what we should be doing is to have the shared calendar as a resource as per http://wiki.sogo.nu/ResourceConfiguration, configured to accept a huge number of multiple bookings, and tell people to create bookings in their personal calendar and invite the shared calendar.
|Thinking a moment more, I am still trying to work out why SOGo doesn't send invitations anyway. Why should a third party, creating an event in a calendar to which they have access, only get invitations triggered if ORGANIZER is the calendar owner? Surely the question of ownership is not relevant to invitation?|
|IIRK this was done, because importing of events from another calendar system with another owner already set, should not trigger invitations again.|
For security reasons it should be an option if a third party could trigger an invitation mail.
In one case we have team assistance with full access to the managers calendar, and it would be nice if there would be send an invitation in form of "Event Invitation: foo bar - on behalf of [Calendar Owner]" with sender address of the team assistance.
|The exposed behavior in Thunderbird has another consequence: events created by user A in B's shared calendar don't appear in A's personal calendar.|
|@jaragundeThat is perfectly normal.|
|@ludovic Thanks for your response :) But I still think that behavior is inconsistent, at least. If you create an event in another person's shared calendar using the web UI, that event appears in your personal calendar, but doing the same from Thunderbird doesn't have the same effect.|
Still an issue with Sogo v3.1.3
Would it at least be possible to add a configuration option that allows to send invitations if the organizer is not the owner of the calendar?
|2015-10-15 12:21||bear-cave||New Issue|
|2015-10-15 12:21||bear-cave||File Added: Samples.txt|
|2015-11-02 10:21||JanKraljic||Note Added: 0009065|
|2015-11-02 10:21||JanKraljic||Tag Attached: calendar|
|2015-11-02 10:21||JanKraljic||Tag Attached: thunderbird|
|2015-11-02 10:21||JanKraljic||Tag Attached: Shared|
|2015-11-03 02:41||JanKraljic||Note Added: 0009066|
|2015-11-05 03:58||JanKraljic||Note Added: 0009071|
|2015-11-05 05:35||bear-cave||Note Added: 0009072|
|2015-11-05 05:53||bear-cave||Note Added: 0009073|
|2016-02-08 09:44||Christian Mack||Note Added: 0009457|
|2016-02-09 11:25||groovepack||Note Added: 0009477|
|2016-05-06 08:14||jaragunde||Note Added: 0010052|
|2016-05-06 13:19||ludovic||Note Added: 0010058|
|2016-05-09 04:45||jaragunde||Note Added: 0010077|
|2016-07-02 08:09||jaywalker||Note Added: 0010464|
|2016-12-23 10:05||ludovic||Changeset attached||=> sogo master 7197b7eb|
|2016-12-23 10:05||ludovic||Assigned To||=> ludovic|
|2016-12-23 10:05||ludovic||Resolution||open => fixed|
|2016-12-23 10:07||ludovic||Status||new => resolved|
|2016-12-23 10:07||ludovic||Fixed in Version||=> 3.2.5|
|2016-12-23 10:09||ludovic||Relationship added||has duplicate 0002863|
|2016-12-23 10:10||ludovic||Relationship added||has duplicate 0002971|