feat: split liaison_statement_posted mailtrigger into outgoing and incoming

[nouralmaa]

Fixes #9434

[rjsparks]

Please put playwright/tests/meeting/floor-plan.spec.js back. If you're seeing playwright failures, they aren't related to what you're working on - call them out to us and we'll identiffy what's happening.

Then make sure migrations ran correctly in your dev instance and regenerate the names fixture with

ietf/manage.py generate_name_fixture --stdout | jq --sort-keys 'sort_by(.model, .pk)' > ietf/name/fixtures/names.json

(You can find that using ietf/manage.py generate_name_fixture --help).
and commit the updated result.

[rjsparks]

Thanks again for helping. Comments inline.

Please let me know if the next set of changes aren't obvious.

[rjsparks]

This should remove liaison_statement_posted

[nouralmaa]

Have attempted to remove with

Mailtrigger.objects.filter(slug__in=("liaison_statement_posted")).delete() 

[rjsparks]

and this should add liaison_statement_posted back

[nouralmaa]

How would you recommend adding this back inside reverse? NB fixture might still be marking liaison_statement_posted as active in this branch

[rjsparks]

This method name used to rely (too much) on the file it was in for context. With this move, it should be something like get_contacts_for_liaison_messages_for_group.

This and the function after it should be merged into one that pays attention to outgoing/incoming, or perhaps one should be named ...primary... and the other ...secondary...

Whether these contacts land in the to or the cc should be up to how the mailtriggers use them, so getting the notion of cc or to out of the name is important. (See the title of #9434).

[nouralmaa]

I've renamed the functions, would they still need outgoing/incoming separate from the mails logic if merged into one inside utils? CC comments need to be revised too.

[rjsparks]

Similarly, this should be something like get_contacts_for_liaison_messages_for_group though that's getting a bit long.

[rjsparks]

(should have edited that before posting it to match the comments above. What's said at L77 is what's intended.)

[rjsparks]

See #8271 - lets add the new Recipient liaison_from_contact to the cc for outgoing.

[rjsparks]

Also see the title of #9434 - lets see if we can make that move from cc to to with this migration.

[nouralmaa]

Have added this to cc for outgoing and to for incoming, ty for noting parent issue

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 96.42857% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 88.87%. Comparing base (ea50ebc) to head (5900c11).
⚠️ Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
ietf/liaisons/views.py	60.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #9553   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   88.86%   88.87%           
=======================================
  Files         319      319           
  Lines       41911    41925   +14     
=======================================
+ Hits        37245    37260   +15     
+ Misses       4666     4665    -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[rjsparks]

If you have time, please make this change, otherwise, we'll finish this out in the next few days.

[rjsparks]

This needs to be a create and the Recipient m2ms will have to be repopulated.

[rjsparks]

I've reworked the migration a bit.