Add the possibility to send base64 encoded attachments to invenio-mail.

[wgresshoff]

❤️ Thank you for your contribution!

Description

It is now possible to send emails with attachments by invenio-mail. They have to be base64 encoded, so they get decoded and attached to the mail.

Checklist

Ticks in all boxes and 🟢 on all GitHub actions status checks are required to merge:

• I'm aware of the code of conduct.
• I've created logical separate commits and followed the commit message format.
• I've added relevant test cases.
• I've added relevant documentation.
• I've identified the copyright holder(s) and updated copyright headers for touched files (>15 lines contributions).
• I've NOT included third-party code (copy/pasted source code or new dependencies).

Third-party code

If you've added third-party code (copy/pasted or new dependencies), please reach out to an architect.

Reminder

By using GitHub, you have already agreed to the GitHub’s Terms of Service including that:

1. You license your contribution under the same terms as the current repository’s license.
2. You agree that you have the right to license your contribution under the current repository’s license.

[ntarocco]

What about limiting the max size?

[wgresshoff]

I was not sure about this: this code is called after the attachment has been pulled from the message queue, so I felt it is too late to do the check here. WDYT?

[ntarocco]

after discussions (and sorry if we did not think about that earlier), maybe a better solution would:

1. create a new func that accept attachments
2. the new method will check the size
3. if valid, it will call an async task

def send_email_attachments(data, attachments):
    """Nice docstring..."""
    for att in attachments:
        ... if att size > config["MAX_ATTACHMENT_SIZE"]:
            fail
    ... update data dict and add attachments ...
    _send_email_attachments.apply_async(data)


@shared_task
def _send_email_attachments
    msg = Message()
    msg.__dict__.update(data)
    msg.attach(content_type=content_type, data=rawdata, disposition=disposition)
    ...

WDYT?

[wgresshoff]

Sounds reasonable, but I'm not quite sure I completely understand your suggestion. The first function is not called via celery but directly? And by calling apply_async a task will be generated? Ok, that would eliminate my objection.

[wgresshoff]

Added a check for size limit and a test to see if it works.

[ntarocco]

Sounds reasonable, but I'm not quite sure I completely understand your suggestion. The first function is not called via celery but directly? And by calling apply_async a task will be generated? Ok, that would eliminate my objection.

You implemented it exactly as I was thinking 🥳

[ntarocco]

Sounds reasonable, but I'm not quite sure I completely understand your suggestion. The first function is not called via celery but directly? And by calling apply_async a task will be generated? Ok, that would eliminate my objection.

You implemented it exactly as I was thinking 🥳

[ntarocco]

Thanks for your contribution!