CiviCRM Core issueshttps://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues2023-11-03T15:31:20Zhttps://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/4734ADMIN_UI: default checkbox2023-11-03T15:31:20ZGuillaumeSorelADMIN_UI: default checkboxCould it be possible to have checkboxes per default for each new admin screen using SK, so it becomes possible to select multiple lines (for mailings, messages templates, custom fields...) and proceed bulk actions on them, especially del...Could it be possible to have checkboxes per default for each new admin screen using SK, so it becomes possible to select multiple lines (for mailings, messages templates, custom fields...) and proceed bulk actions on them, especially delete?
New SK screens are sweet but actions still need to be proceeded one-by-one.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/4029Around 5.49 pan_truncation and card_type_id (containing card type VISA/MC and...2023-05-05T13:23:07ZStoobAround 5.49 pan_truncation and card_type_id (containing card type VISA/MC and last 4 digits last four digits stopped getting recordedDoes anyone know the reasoning behind this and if it's deliberate or a bug? We used Authorize.net consistently. No change that I'm aware of the the config other than upgrade to 5.49, since then these 2 fields haven't been getting filled...Does anyone know the reasoning behind this and if it's deliberate or a bug? We used Authorize.net consistently. No change that I'm aware of the the config other than upgrade to 5.49, since then these 2 fields haven't been getting filled in with any online translations.
I checked these tables in the schema and confirmed it's not a display issue - _the data doesn't exist_ in table: `civicrm_financial_trxn` columns: `pan_truncation` and `card_type_id`
Example of what it looks like in the UI prior to 5.49
![yes](/uploads/3efbb6e78e2526d9525ec28d6cfa060c/yes.png)
And now after 5.49
![nope](/uploads/24429e375e0c3f708d10a38059d70eff/nope.png)5.60.0https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3776CiviCRM - next version? Getting fit for future...2022-08-24T03:00:46ZTobias KrauseCiviCRM - next version? Getting fit for future...Sorry if this ticket is too general but I don't know where to go with my concerns.
We just updated our servers to PHP 8.0 (which was released im November 2020) and then I found some warnings in the logs about deprecated code. To find th...Sorry if this ticket is too general but I don't know where to go with my concerns.
We just updated our servers to PHP 8.0 (which was released im November 2020) and then I found some warnings in the logs about deprecated code. To find the reasons for these I diged into the code basis of CiviCRM and I found out that CiviCRM relys on very old frameworks (e.g. Smarty version 2.6 from the year 2016) or on frameworks not really actively maintained (zetacomponents/mail from the year 2020). Just two examples but I feel if I would check the other dependencies there might be some more old frameworks.
The tip for now from the Civi-community: stay on PHP 7.4 - which will reach end of life by November this year. Even PHP 8.0 will just receive security updates until November this year so that from November on PHP 8.1 would be the correct version - on which CiviCRM is absolutely not working as I already tested.
Now I got very concerned about the next years. We heavily use CiviCRM in our daily work for the administration of thousands of donators and newsletter subscribers and for the newsletter sending so that CiviCRM is the main tool of our daily work. And now CiviCRM already feels a little bit like a dinosaur to me - especially compared with Drupal 9 I am working with in general. I fear that CiviCRM cannot keep up with the ongoing developments of PHP (and JavaScript).
My question: are there any plans for updating the dependencies? Maybe even a plan to change to more modern frameworks like Twig? I found a roadmap where Form Builder, CiviCRM Standalone and UI Improvements are listed but this feels just like some new features based on the current code basis.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3466On_hold field for phone record2024-02-28T05:03:22Zmagnolia61On_hold field for phone recordOverview
----------------------------------------
I think by design the civicrm_phone table should also have an on_hold field in order to 'block' individual phone numbers from receiving calls and texts.
I think this would help to better...Overview
----------------------------------------
I think by design the civicrm_phone table should also have an on_hold field in order to 'block' individual phone numbers from receiving calls and texts.
I think this would help to better refine the means to comply to privacy regulations.
Current behaviour
----------------------------------------
Only on a contact level do_not_call and do_not_sms are available as options
Proposed behaviour
----------------------------------------
Just like the civicrm_email table individual phone numbers can be 'disabled' from receiving (automatic) texts and calls.
Comments
----------------------------------------
I am not really able to code this but would be able to help think about it and help test.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3446Please include Contributors and Reviewers website address in the CiviCRM Rele...2024-01-25T05:03:22Zjustinfreeman (Agileware)Please include Contributors and Reviewers website address in the CiviCRM Release Notes and CiviCRM Blog PostThis is a request to please include the Contributors and Reviewers website address in the CiviCRM Release Notes and CiviCRM Blog Post. Currently, no link to their website is shown at all. And there are only links to CiviCRM Partner Profi...This is a request to please include the Contributors and Reviewers website address in the CiviCRM Release Notes and CiviCRM Blog Post. Currently, no link to their website is shown at all. And there are only links to CiviCRM Partner Profiles.
It would be a nice way of giving credit to all people involved by including a link to their website.
Appreciate this requires some changes to how the release notes and blog posts are compiled, happy to help make this happen.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3444Contribution balance token2023-09-24T22:55:47Zmagnolia61Contribution balance tokenOverview
----------------------------------------
Would it be technically easy and functional desired to have contribution balance token?
Example use-case
----------------------------------------
We would like to advocate for an contrib...Overview
----------------------------------------
Would it be technically easy and functional desired to have contribution balance token?
Example use-case
----------------------------------------
We would like to advocate for an contribution balance token
Current behaviour
----------------------------------------
1. We want to send our customers an email with the amount due, or the amount that is pending refund.
2. There is a balance field in the event participant context. But this is absent in the contribution context.
Proposed behaviour
----------------------------------------
A custom token field like {contribution.balance} is available in the contribution context
Comments
----------------------------------------
Eileen opened an issue to enable a balance field for api4 (and an total paid field): https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/2890https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3433FormBuilder: allow multiple email/phone/address blocks with pre-set location ...2024-01-21T05:03:28ZStéphane Lussierstephane@symbiotic.coopFormBuilder: allow multiple email/phone/address blocks with pre-set location typesOverview
----------------------------------------
I like the flexibility of _afform_ and its ability to edit multiple fields on the fly :
![afform](/uploads/132b8354b92569465f49a464dd9fd4f7/image.png)
...but sometimes, it would be ni...Overview
----------------------------------------
I like the flexibility of _afform_ and its ability to edit multiple fields on the fly :
![afform](/uploads/132b8354b92569465f49a464dd9fd4f7/image.png)
...but sometimes, it would be nice if it could also do this :
![profile](/uploads/83b66e2904f2391d6d7d56e971d279bd/image.png)
Current behaviour
----------------------------------------
Afform currently exposes all its flexibility to the end user by providing all available options to composite fields.
Proposed behaviour
----------------------------------------
Provide the ability to pre-configure a given amount of multiple fields in order to simplify the end-user interface and expose those fields immediately once the form is loaded.
Comments
----------------------------------------
In the case of an email field, we would be able to decide in advance the location of each field and/or specify which of those fields should be the main one.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3129The way the Most Recent Activity column on Find Cases is calculated makes no ...2023-12-04T05:03:27ZDaveDThe way the Most Recent Activity column on Find Cases is calculated makes no senseIt shares code with the Case Dashboard, where the Most Recent Activity column only appears in a section for cases that have _recent_ activity. But on Find Cases depending on your search criteria it will of course include cases that do no...It shares code with the Case Dashboard, where the Most Recent Activity column only appears in a section for cases that have _recent_ activity. But on Find Cases depending on your search criteria it will of course include cases that do not have recent activity. For those cases, the column displays blank, when it really should simply display the most recent activity, whenever it was.
To reproduce, create a case and complete an activity. Wait 2 weeks. Then do a find cases and look at the Most Recent Activity column for that case.
Does Find Cases even need this column?https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/2972track CiviMail metrics by mailing group2023-10-24T05:03:27Zhescotrack CiviMail metrics by mailing groupOverview
----------------------------------------
_Please describe your improvement in detail._
As a user of CiviMail, when examining the delivery and performance metrics on a mailing which was sent to multiple mailing groups, I should ...Overview
----------------------------------------
_Please describe your improvement in detail._
As a user of CiviMail, when examining the delivery and performance metrics on a mailing which was sent to multiple mailing groups, I should be able to exclude mailing groups from the metrics for that mailing to observe how each mailing group a recipient of a mailing is performing. In the recipients section of the report, each group should be associated with a checkbox which will control whether an included (or excluded ???) group is accounted for in the metrics displayed in a view of the report.
Example use-case
----------------------------------------
At this url, and those which I can drill down to from here:
/civicrm/mailing/report?mid=${mailing_id}&reset=1
by toggling on or off checkboxes and hitting a refresh button, I should be able to update a the metrics on the report view; and any view accessible by drilling down through the available links and buttons, should clearly indicate which mailing groups are accounted for by the metrics displayed on that drilled-down-to view.
Current behaviour
----------------------------------------
_What is currently possible? What limit ?_
Currently to achieve this level of granularity in the reporting views I have to create multiple mailings, being careful in how I set them up to exclude mailing groups which were included on previous mailings. This works, but is unnecessarily cumbersome to set up; and to track the results, cluttering my browser with multiple open tabs to monitor results on the multiple mailings.
Proposed behaviour
----------------------------------------
_What should happen? How is this better? If appropriate/available, include any wireframes or mockups._
I would rather have a single mailing defined by its content, and the ability to parse the metrics on that mailing by recipient mailing group by toggling checkboxes.
Comments
----------------------------------------
_Anything else you would like the reviewer to note._
Thanks again.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3203When using the Search Kit and Form Builder to implement a front-end Search Li...2023-12-20T05:03:24Zjustinfreeman (Agileware)When using the Search Kit and Form Builder to implement a front-end Search Listing, how do include a Reset button to clear the search criteria?When using the Search Kit and Form Builder to implement a front-end Search Listing, how do include a Reset button to clear the search criteria?
Ideally, this button would be displayed AFTER the Search button.
![Screenshot_20211112_1744...When using the Search Kit and Form Builder to implement a front-end Search Listing, how do include a Reset button to clear the search criteria?
Ideally, this button would be displayed AFTER the Search button.
![Screenshot_20211112_174423](/uploads/a065207345c884f41eae014ae25e1a8d/Screenshot_20211112_174423.png)https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/2854ipAddress function and front-end proxies (like Varnish)2023-10-01T05:03:27ZAlanDixonipAddress function and front-end proxies (like Varnish)There are times where CiviCRM likes to know who it's talking to, i.e. the ip address of the visitor.
This matters especially when it gets passed on to a payment processor (e.g. for the purposes of mitigating card tumbling).
Here's the ...There are times where CiviCRM likes to know who it's talking to, i.e. the ip address of the visitor.
This matters especially when it gets passed on to a payment processor (e.g. for the purposes of mitigating card tumbling).
Here's the utility function that does that for several core-shipped payment processors:
https://github.com/civicrm/civicrm-core/blob/b599743f3daa46ab96c09ebe410fbb833cdd080f/CRM/Utils/System.php#L1293
This code is fairly naive, but notably makes use of the fact that Drupal 7 (and earlier) that had a function "ip_address()" that would pay attention to the Drupal configuration to be able to deal with front end proxies.
Unfortunately, D8/9 no longer includes this function, but more importantly, it also fails for other CMSs.
In researching this issue, I noticed that D8/9 now uses a core symphony function, which might provide a better solution than using our current CMS-specific approach.
Specifically, in Drupal, you can reliably get the 'client' ip with this: return Drupal::request()->getClientIp();
Assuming civicrm has a container similar to Drupal, a similar solution might be available for CiviCRM.
It's reasonable to ask whether ipAddress should be changed in this way - here's a search showing where this function gets called:
https://github.com/civicrm/civicrm-core/search?q=ipAddresshttps://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/2794Sort order of userdashboard event listing2023-10-21T13:17:38Zmagnolia61Sort order of userdashboard event listingWhile in the event dashboard I understand the registered_date to be the sort order,
In the userdashboard tab for events a sort order by event startdate would be more logic.
I have been searching where this is configured, but could not f...While in the event dashboard I understand the registered_date to be the sort order,
In the userdashboard tab for events a sort order by event startdate would be more logic.
I have been searching where this is configured, but could not find it.
Basically I'm asking
1) if more people agree with the default sort order by event date
2) where to find a place to change the default sort order in the user dashboard tabhttps://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/2765Revisit the decision to enforce the CMS new user account option, allow CiviCR...2023-09-26T05:03:25Zjustinfreeman (Agileware)Revisit the decision to enforce the CMS new user account option, allow CiviCRM to create CMS user accounts when CMS has public registrations disabledRaising this a request to revisit the decision [originating in 2009 (CRM-4036)](https://issues.civicrm.org/jira/browse/CRM-4036.html) to enforce the CMS new user account option and instead **allow CiviCRM to create CMS user accounts when...Raising this a request to revisit the decision [originating in 2009 (CRM-4036)](https://issues.civicrm.org/jira/browse/CRM-4036.html) to enforce the CMS new user account option and instead **allow CiviCRM to create CMS user accounts when CMS has public registrations disabled**.
There are three key reasons to have this functionality:
1. Public registrations on websites attract spamming and therefore require moderation and anti-spam systems to be in place.
2. For member-only websites, the method to because a member is using the membership sign-up form (CiviCRM) and when the membership fee is paid, that's when the corresponding CMS user account should be created. And not by any other means.
3. With user account creation disabled, a separate and in some cases manual process needs to be performed to create the corresponding user account for members - which is a waste of effort.
With the current logic where CiviCRM uses the CMS configuration, the site must be open for public user registrations to support CiviCRM registering a member user account.
The change is relatively simple and would be removing the check of the user registration option for each supported CMS. Thus CiviCRM Profiles can be used to create CMS accounts.
See also related, _User Profiles, the User account registration option is displayed even when the CMS has the "User can register" option disabled_ - https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/user-interface/-/issues/41
Agileware Ref: CIVICRM-1809https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/2737Search display permissions issue (search kit)2021-08-17T21:07:08ZeileenSearch display permissions issue (search kit)When viewing a configured (table) search display the 'Administer CiviCRM' - or at least 'Administer CiviCRM data' is required. I don't believe that is intentional as the SearchDislay.run action does not require administer CiviCRM - but ...When viewing a configured (table) search display the 'Administer CiviCRM' - or at least 'Administer CiviCRM data' is required. I don't believe that is intentional as the SearchDislay.run action does not require administer CiviCRM - but other api calls (notably SearchDisplay.get) on that page DO require administer civicrm data.
My understanding is a search display should work for 'any user' but not necessarily return results (permission dependent) whereas a search form permits permissions to be overridden
@colemanw as you can tell I'm looking at search kit this week :-)https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/2736Searchkit - can't export more than x rows2022-05-24T14:07:07ZeileenSearchkit - can't export more than x rowsI'm not sure the exact limit but there IS a limit to how many rows can be exported through search kit and it's not that high. The issue is the url itself becomes too long to be accepted - so we wind up with a 414 error
I think we need t...I'm not sure the exact limit but there IS a limit to how many rows can be exported through search kit and it's not that high. The issue is the url itself becomes too long to be accepted - so we wind up with a 414 error
I think we need to think of another way to pass this list than via a url - potentially even the dreaded prev_next cache.
![image](/uploads/692290f1cf5edf0e62ff792078b0a62f/image.png)
@colemanw @totten what do you think the right approach is - to save to the prev-next cache & pass along a key to reference the results?https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/2734Search kit / afform allow default for filters2021-08-05T02:27:08ZeileenSearch kit / afform allow default for filtersWe would really like to be able to configure a default for our filters - ie in the screenshot below the ideal would be to be able to specify the default filter for date as 'this calendar month'.
![image](/uploads/3b012f7a67bb728523877a...We would really like to be able to configure a default for our filters - ie in the screenshot below the ideal would be to be able to specify the default filter for date as 'this calendar month'.
![image](/uploads/3b012f7a67bb728523877a2b357f577e/image.png)https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/2732SearchKit: have a quick Export task2021-09-02T17:11:13ZbgmSearchKit: have a quick Export taskCurrently, users can export from SearchKit using the traditional Export wizard of CiviCRM, which requires users to select a mapping and a few other options.
As a user, I would like to be able to quickly export the data as seen on the sc...Currently, users can export from SearchKit using the traditional Export wizard of CiviCRM, which requires users to select a mapping and a few other options.
As a user, I would like to be able to quickly export the data as seen on the screen.5.42.0https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/2722Search kit - totals2023-09-07T05:03:27ZeileenSearch kit - totalsI had a super nice experience using search kit + afform to do a reconciliation last night. Being able to swap out the financial type & have it update without the overhead of a quick form reload was great & I was able to set up the contri...I had a super nice experience using search kit + afform to do a reconciliation last night. Being able to swap out the financial type & have it update without the overhead of a quick form reload was great & I was able to set up the contributions to edit in a popup via a link
What would have made it better would have been a grand total for the filtered results - I had to keep refreshing my civi-report to get totals
@colemanw just one for your mental list of feature requestshttps://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/2704Search kit request - calculated field in display2023-07-31T14:53:02ZeileenSearch kit request - calculated field in displayFeature request for the option to have calculated fields in search displays e.g a field that displays SUM('custom_money_field' + 'total_amount') - or COALLESCE('nick_name', 'first_name')Feature request for the option to have calculated fields in search displays e.g a field that displays SUM('custom_money_field' + 'total_amount') - or COALLESCE('nick_name', 'first_name')https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/2703Not possible to set the location type (address, mail, telephone) to a specifi...2021-08-31T08:28:06ZNadaillacNot possible to set the location type (address, mail, telephone) to a specific valueWhen I create a form, I would prefer to set the mail type to a specific value and not present this field to the user. Like in a CiviCRM profile.
I cannot find the field in the list of fields for the values to be set.
![Address_type](/u...When I create a form, I would prefer to set the mail type to a specific value and not present this field to the user. Like in a CiviCRM profile.
I cannot find the field in the list of fields for the values to be set.
![Address_type](/uploads/b7b7db251b7aa404cc0a0d94a6fbe8fc/Address_type.png)colemanwcolemanw