iequidoo

This is ready for review and all the tests work, but should be merged after #7373 apparently because this adds a check for `is_partial_download` to `is_probably_private_reply()` which we don't want....

Btw, after the timeout (e.g. 10 mins) the contact can be marked as "verified by an unknown contact", such a verification looks safe because it doesn't have any strong meaning

10 minutes indeed look at least inconvenient for all use cases. One more option is to allow the first verification for a longer period, maybe even 1 week as currently....

We should consider scheduling `housekeeping()` after program start, this way the user can trigger WAL checkpointing also. `housekeeping()` is scheduled after deletion of messages and chats, but this isn't a...

Also w/o WAL autocheckpointing there's another interesting option: we can disable running `wal_checkpoint` for some time at all, e.g. after a version upgrade and this way provide a way to...

If a bot deletes messages or chats, `delete_msgs_locally_done()` triggers housekeeping, so the WAL shouldn't grow a lot. But i agree that it makes sense to register our own WAL hook...

`rusqlite::Connection::wal_hook()` isn't really useful because it takes `fn`, so not much we can do there. But overall i think it's simpler to run `wal_checkpoint()` from `inbox_loop()` than trying to solve...

`test_markseen_message_and_mdn` fails and it has a comment: ``` # Please only change this test if you are very sure that it will still catch the issues it catches now. #...