搜索 | 用户支持

防范以用户支持为名的诈骗。我们绝对不会要求您拨打电话或发送短信,及提供任何个人信息。请使用“举报滥用”选项报告涉及违规的行为。

详细了解

SoGo CalDAV calendars do not show up in Accept Invitation dialog

  • 3 个回答
  • 1 人有此问题
  • 25 次查看
  • 最后回复者为 mozilla415

more options

Hi!

I recently moved my calendars to a SOGo instance, and added those to Thunderbird via CalDAV. Generally, everything works just fine - I can see and edit events and tasks.

However, there is one issue: When I'm sent an invitation, I don't see those calendars listed in the "Select calendar" dialog that shows when I click on "Accept".

When I click on "More"->"Save copy", they are displayed.

What I tried/verified: - The calendars are not write-protected. - Each calendar has an associated email address. - Each email address is only associated to a single calendar.

Do you have an idea why Thunderbird doesn't show those calendars in the "Accept" dialog?

Hi! I recently moved my calendars to a SOGo instance, and added those to Thunderbird via CalDAV. Generally, everything works just fine - I can see and edit events and tasks. However, there is one issue: When I'm sent an invitation, I don't see those calendars listed in the "Select calendar" dialog that shows when I click on "Accept". When I click on "More"->"Save copy", they are displayed. What I tried/verified: - The calendars are not write-protected. - Each calendar has an associated email address. - Each email address is only associated to a single calendar. Do you have an idea why Thunderbird doesn't show those calendars in the "Accept" dialog?

所有回复 (3)

more options
Each calendar has an associated email address.

Has the invitation been sent to any of those associated email addresses?

more options

Yes. And invitations with that address have worked previously, before moving the calendars to the SOGo server.

(the calendars are stored under a different domain than said email address, but that has always been the case)

more options

I've filed a bug report, as I don't expect that this behavior is intended: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1828138

(also there appeared another related issue, that is clearly a bug)