CiviCRM Core issueshttps://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues2022-12-08T09:43:19Zhttps://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/4024progress output on stdout when emails are processed as activities2022-12-08T09:43:19Zsebalisprogress output on stdout when emails are processed as activitiesOn a CiviCRM instance I administrate, the Civi cron job is run via “cv api job.execute” with appropriate user and cwd parameters. The output is normally in JSON, so I decided to parse the output to see if there have been any problems. If...On a CiviCRM instance I administrate, the Civi cron job is run via “cv api job.execute” with appropriate user and cwd parameters. The output is normally in JSON, so I decided to parse the output to see if there have been any problems. If there are no problems, I suppress the output completely, to prevent Linux cron (which triggers the whole thing) from sending an automatic email to the admins. This has worked well so far.
For a short while we have defined two new email accounts that we use for “email to activity”. When there are new emails, we now get output on stdout that makes it impossible to parse the output as JSON. This prevents making the automatic decision on whether there has been a problem, so I revert to sending an email and I keep the output.
I looked into the cause and found that CRM/Utils/Mail/EmailProcessor.php contains several lines that write to stdout. To me these outputs should better go to the CiviCRM log or to stderr. But I don’t know what standards you follow for this or other components, so at this point I am not able to submit a pull request.
You can find the output I am referring to by searching CRM/Utils/Mail/EmailProcessor.php for the string “echo”. I quote them here, together with my opinion of what I would do with them (biased because of my current problem of course):
```
212 catch (Exception $e) {
213 echo $e->getMessage();
214 $store->markIgnored($key);
215 continue;
216 }
```
This seems better placed on stderr or as an error entry in the Civi log.
```
229 echo "Failed Processing: {$mail->subject}. Reason: {$result['error_message']}\n";
```
Same as above.
```
234 echo "Processed as Activity: {$mail->subject}\n";
```
This is the line I regularly get. I think a Civi log entry with an appropriate level below warning should be enough, or it should go to stderr.
```
391 echo "Failed Processing: {$mail->subject}, Action: $action, Job ID: $job, Queue ID: $queue, Hash: $hash. Reason: {$r esult['error_message']}\n";
```
Same as earlier, error entry in the Civi log or stderr
These lines have been around for many years (I checked), and there might be similar examples in several other places. Again, I don’t know what your conventions are.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/4023Check Clean URLs check: Frequent error noise when no contribution pages and p...2022-12-08T09:42:33ZJonGoldCheck Clean URLs check: Frequent error noise when no contribution pages and public can't access events#### Replication Steps
* Be on WordPress.
* Have no contribution pages.
* Have at least 1 active event.
* Remove "CiviEvent: register for events" permission from anonymous user.
Get a bunch of these errors:
```
[error]
$Fatal Error De...#### Replication Steps
* Be on WordPress.
* Have no contribution pages.
* Have at least 1 active event.
* Remove "CiviEvent: register for events" permission from anonymous user.
Get a bunch of these errors:
```
[error]
$Fatal Error Details = array:3 [
"message" => "You do not have permission to access this page."
"code" => null
"exception" => CRM_Core_Exception {#8688
#message: "You do not have permission to access this page."
#code: 0
#file: "/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-content/plugins/civicrm/civicrm/CRM/Utils/System/WordPress.php"
#line: 615
#cause: null
-_trace: null
-errorData: array:1 [
"error_code" => 0
]
trace: {
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-content/plugins/civicrm/civicrm/CRM/Utils/System/WordPress.php:615 {
› $civicrm_wp_title = ts('You do not have permission to access this page.');
› throw new CRM_Core_Exception(ts('You do not have permission to access this page.'));
› }
}
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-content/plugins/civicrm/civicrm/CRM/Utils/System.php:62 { …}
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-content/plugins/civicrm/civicrm/CRM/Event/Page/EventInfo.php:42 { …}
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-content/plugins/civicrm/civicrm/CRM/Core/Invoke.php:319 { …}
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-content/plugins/civicrm/civicrm/CRM/Core/Invoke.php:69 { …}
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-content/plugins/civicrm/civicrm/CRM/Core/Invoke.php:36 { …}
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-content/plugins/civicrm/civicrm.php:1199 { …}
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-content/plugins/civicrm/includes/civicrm.basepage.php:380 { …}
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-includes/class-wp-hook.php:308 { …}
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-includes/class-wp-hook.php:332 { …}
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-includes/plugin.php:565 { …}
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-includes/class-wp.php:797 { …}
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-includes/functions.php:1332 { …}
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/wp-blog-header.php:16 { …}
/home/jon/local/nmysite/web/index.php:17 { …}
}
}
]
```
I want to ping Eli Lisseck but I don't think they're pingable?https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/1036Deprecate Tell a Friend2022-12-06T23:14:44ZAndie HuntDeprecate Tell a FriendWho tells their friends anymore? This really should be removed or deprecated.
@JonGold came up with this idea and @bgm thought it would be worth opening an issue for it.Who tells their friends anymore? This really should be removed or deprecated.
@JonGold came up with this idea and @bgm thought it would be worth opening an issue for it.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/4011Formbuilder: Error in date selection of grouped activities2022-11-30T08:39:02ZjmargrafFormbuilder: Error in date selection of grouped activitiesOverview
----------------------------------------
The data range picker of the Formbuilder does not work for Activities grouped by acitivity_type.
It should show the sum of activities per activity_type in a defined data range.
Instead th...Overview
----------------------------------------
The data range picker of the Formbuilder does not work for Activities grouped by acitivity_type.
It should show the sum of activities per activity_type in a defined data range.
Instead the result always shows the total sum of activities per activitiy_type - no matter what date range i select.
Reproduction steps
----------------------------------------
1. create a new Packaged Search with Searchkit. [saved-search.txt](/uploads/ecc2154067e2c15e2993679fd645ff54/saved-search.txt) with the following API Query Info:
```
{
"version": 4,
"select": [
"COUNT(subject) AS COUNT_subject",
"activity_type_id:label"
],
"orderBy": [],
"where": [],
"groupBy": [
"activity_type_id"
],
"join": [],
"having": []
}
```
2. Create an Table to view the Saved Search in a Table
3. Create a new Search Form with Formbuilder using this Saved Search Table
```
<div af-fieldset="">
<af-field name="activity_date_time" defn="{input_type: 'Select', search_range: true, input_attrs: {}}" />
<crm-search-display-table search-name="debug_activity" display-name=""></crm-search-display-table>
</div>
```
4. Add the date picker "date of the activity"
5. Use the Formbuilder and search for grouped data in a certain time range
Current behaviour
----------------------------------------
`COUNT_subject` does always show the same sum, no matter what date selection i choose
![data-range-2](/uploads/7612612fbe53450efee51373fa9f6000/data-range-2.png)
![issue-data-range-no-selection](/uploads/9dd3650f48840c5e1405db15433003c5/issue-data-range-no-selection.png)
![issue-data-range](/uploads/840e2efea6d12f4a6baf15b55bddf833/issue-data-range.png)
Expected behaviour
----------------------------------------
`COUNT_subject` should show the number of activities of a certain actitity_type in the defined data range.
Environment information
----------------------------------------
<!-- Some of the items below may not be relevant for every bug - if in doubt please include more information than you think is neccessary. -->
* __Browser:__ _Firefox 107.0
* __CiviCRM:__ 5.50.4
* __PHP:__ 7.4.33
* __CMS:__ Drupal 9.4.8
* __Database:__ MySQL 5.7.7/MariaDB 10.4/..._
* __Web Server:__ _Apache 2.4/Nginx 1.16/..._
Comments
----------------------------------------
_Anything else you would like the reviewer to note._https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3874APIv4 Relationships refused if duplicated2022-11-26T20:59:14ZshaneonabikeAPIv4 Relationships refused if duplicated**Backlog**
I see that @samuelsov already reported this, but the bot closed the issue #451.
**Disabled Relationships**
I came across a scenario where if a Contact Relationship was disabled, and you attempt to create a new one (that ma...**Backlog**
I see that @samuelsov already reported this, but the bot closed the issue #451.
**Disabled Relationships**
I came across a scenario where if a Contact Relationship was disabled, and you attempt to create a new one (that matches dates) it is refused. Ironically, the UI let's me add the Relationship.
+ Create a Relationship with a start / end date
+ Disable relationship
+ Create a new Relationship with the same start / end date via UI (works)
+ Create a new Relationship with the same start / end date via APIv4 (fails with Duplicate Exception)
**Cases**
Today, I came across another scenario where we are using ActivityProfile with CiviRules. The gist is that when someone submits a CiviCase then CiviRules assigned the Case Coordinator to their case. It's the same person each time.
In this scenario, the APIv4 is also refused the submission because of the duplicated Relationship. But really I think it makes sense to have multiple cases open for one person with the same case coordinator managing them all right?
My scenario can be replicated without ActivityProfile
+ Create a Case for test user A and Coordinator X
+ Create a new Case for Test User A
+ Use the APiv4 to setup a relationship to Coordinator X
It should throw an exception Duplicate Relationship on relationship.create.
Thoughts?https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3996Event Registration that has error in Profile should continue to propagate Lin...2022-11-22T14:36:05ZshaneonabikeEvent Registration that has error in Profile should continue to propagate Line ItemsTo be honest I didn't know how to clearly define this title so feel free to change it.
## Problem
We encountered an interesting situation whereby during an Event registration the actual payment went through, but the Line items were mis...To be honest I didn't know how to clearly define this title so feel free to change it.
## Problem
We encountered an interesting situation whereby during an Event registration the actual payment went through, but the Line items were missing. When I looked further I discovered that there was an error due to missing / incorrectly configured fields in a Profile that was part of the Event registration.
This Profile was throwing an Exception, because it could not insert the record into the DB. I realize it makes sense to actually return that Exception, but what I question is whether the line items shouldn't be recorded. In this case, the transaction is completed (below), but the line items aren't there because of the exception.
![Selection_002](/uploads/45666402495106c8814a8de1d2837f1b/Selection_002.png)
## Recreate
1. Create a Custom Field set associated to a Contact, and add several fields
2. Create profile and add those fields
3. Create an Event
4. Add that Profile to the Event
5. Add a custom Price Set with several fields
6. Save
From this point, I'm not certain how this came about but I'm guessing the next steps would be:
1. Create a new set of Custom Fields identical to above and recreate associated to Participant and your Event type
1. Delete the first original Custom Field set, but not the profile
2. Register for the Event
I think where this happens is when the actual ```entity_id``` clashes (well in my case it was). So you would need to register multiple times to make this happen. In the DB teh value table for us was
```
civicrm_value_collector_det_16 | CREATE TABLE `civicrm_value_collector_det_16` (
`id` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT COMMENT 'Default MySQL primary key',
`entity_id` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL COMMENT 'Table that this extends',
`name_of_individual_collecting_th_50` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
`is_someone_collecting_this_order_51` tinyint(4) DEFAULT NULL,
`phone_number_52` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`id`),
UNIQUE KEY `unique_entity_id` (`entity_id`),
KEY `INDEX_phone_number_52` (`phone_number_52`),
KEY `INDEX_name_of_individual_collecting_th_50` (`name_of_individual_collecting_th_50`),
CONSTRAINT `FK_civicrm_value_collector_det_16_entity_id` FOREIGN KEY (`entity_id`) REFERENCES `civicrm_contact` (`id`) ON DELETE CASCADE
) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=140 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8mb4 COLLATE=utf8mb4_unicode_ci |
```
## Actual Error
_DB Error: Constraint_ via
```
[debug_info] => INSERT INTO civicrm_value_collector_det_16 ( `is_someone_collecting_this_order_51`,
`name_of_individual_collecting_th_50`,`phone_number_52`,`entity_id` ) VALUES ( 0,'','',128 )
ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE `is_someone_collecting_this_order_51` = 0,
`name_of_individual_collecting_th_50` = '',`phone_number_52` = ''
[nativecode=1452 ** Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constraint fails
(`sitesite`.`civicrm_value_collector_det_16`, CONSTRAINT
`FK_civicrm_value_collector_det_16_entity_id` FOREIGN KEY (`entity_id`)
REFERENCES `civicrm_contact` (`id`) ON DELETE CASCADE)]
```
## Possible improvements
1. Process the transaction
2. Process line items
3. Save to DB
4. Process Profiles after?
or
1. Process transaction
2. Process Profile (if an exception cache it)
3. Continue as before
4. Throw Exception at end?
I'm not sure, but the fact that the transaction is passed we should ensure that the line items are saved too.
Sorry for the long text!https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3987Scheduled reminders can't be used with memberships with autorenewal disabled2022-11-17T07:21:23Zaydunsaidan.saunders@squiffle.ukScheduled reminders can't be used with memberships with autorenewal disabledAs described in https://civicrm.stackexchange.com/q/42905/225 scheduled reminders can't be used for memberships where autorenewal is not offered. Autorenewal has to be optional or required.As described in https://civicrm.stackexchange.com/q/42905/225 scheduled reminders can't be used for memberships where autorenewal is not offered. Autorenewal has to be optional or required.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3970SearchKit data segmentation: ability to AND/OR conditions per item2022-11-10T16:53:45ZherbdoolSearchKit data segmentation: ability to AND/OR conditions per itemI'm guessing that the conditions are currently AND. I have a use case for needing an OR if this is possible.
For example, a field either has a specific string OR that same field is blank.I'm guessing that the conditions are currently AND. I have a use case for needing an OR if this is possible.
For example, a field either has a specific string OR that same field is blank.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3959Event Scheduled Reminder Behavior2022-11-10T07:20:20ZLKuttnerEvent Scheduled Reminder BehaviorI am wondering if this behavior has been changed-- I did not see any online mention of a change with Scheduled Reminders.
Scenario: A schedule event reminder was set for 24 hours before the event start time 4:00 PM Tuesday.
On Monday at...I am wondering if this behavior has been changed-- I did not see any online mention of a change with Scheduled Reminders.
Scenario: A schedule event reminder was set for 24 hours before the event start time 4:00 PM Tuesday.
On Monday at 4:00 PM, 24 Hours before the event, the reminder is successfully sent to registered attendees.
On Tuesday, the day of the event, additional contacts register.
Expected behavior: The scheduled reminder that was sent on the previous day is NOT sent to new registrants.
Experienced behavior: The reminder scheduled for the previous day is sent ten minutes after a new contact registered.
I do not find any explanation for the later sent reminder emails.
This is with CiviCRM 5.45.7 on Drupal 7 with PHP 7.3.29https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3971SearchKit data segmentation: add Clone and Export actions2022-11-10T07:04:03ZherbdoolSearchKit data segmentation: add Clone and Export actionsCurrently there are Edit and Delete actions. It would be useful to also have Clone and Export actions, just like the main SearchKit tab.Currently there are Edit and Delete actions. It would be useful to also have Clone and Export actions, just like the main SearchKit tab.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3910afform: Support url-params and other config options for Values in Submmission...2022-11-03T17:23:57ZAllenShawafform: Support url-params and other config options for Values in Submmission formsPer conversations with @kurund , @totten , and @colemanw at the 2022 Manchester sprint:
Submission forms currently offer configuration of Values as a way to ensure a certain value is submitted for a given property of the submitted entit...Per conversations with @kurund , @totten , and @colemanw at the 2022 Manchester sprint:
Submission forms currently offer configuration of Values as a way to ensure a certain value is submitted for a given property of the submitted entity, without displaying a field to the form user. Currently it's only possible to specify a static value for each Value. This issue covers work to increase this functionality by allowing the specification of more options for each value. As a start, we're aiming to support these: a default value; and a value defined by URL parameter (overriding the default value). Future efforts may allow for defining a mechanism for on-page calculation of the value; specifying that the submitted value should not be applied if updating an existing entity (could be useful e.g. for Source field); and more.
## New attributes:
At the start we aim to support only these:
- `default`: the default value
- `urlparam`: the name of a URL parameter from which the value can be taken (which value, if given, will override the `default` value)
We're also aiming to make decisions now which would facilitate adding other attributes in the future.
## UI changes:
- Move the Values section out of the "pallette" pane in the left, to a new "Values" tab in the "canvas" pane on the right:
![values](/uploads/4a5fb8bd7c29c136ddb18ebc191e7201/values.png)
- For each defined Value, support configuration of various attributes, probably through a pop-up accessed through a gear icon, similar to that already in use under for fields under the Fields tab:
![gear2](/uploads/6c850f34b123efd4651720ff50ef30e1/gear2.png)
Rationale:
- We currently have the "Values" configuration appearing at the top of the left-side "pallette" pane. This leaves limited space for configuration options on each Value, whereas there will be more room for that in the "canvas" pane.
- It would make for a more consisten user experience to treat the left-side "pallette" only as a pool of available entity properties (fields), and the right-side "canvas" as the place for configuring those properties which one has selected for use in the form.
## Form storage/schema changes:
Values are currently stored in the form markup within the `data` attribute of each `<af-entity>` tag; e.g. this line indicates that the do_not_email field should be forced to "yes":
```
<af-entity data="{contact_type: 'Individual', do_not_email: '1'}" type="Contact" name="Individual1" label="Individual 1" actions="{create: true, update: true}" security="RBAC" />
```
To store these additional config options, we make some changes to this schema:
- Values will be stored as an `<af-field>` element within the `<af-entity>` container, so that the above-mentioned `<af-entity>` tag would be represented like so:
```
<af-entity data="{contact_type: 'Individual'}" type="Contact" name="Individual1" label="Individual 1" actions="{create: true, update: true}" security="RBAC">
<af-field name="do_not_email" default="1" />
</af-entity>
```
Rationale:
- The `<af-field>` tag is appropriate here because these "entity properties" are in fact fields -- though they won't be presented as _form_ fields, they will be submitted as _API_ fields (consider the "getFields" api action).
- Storing as attributes of an `<af-field>` tag is an alternative to cramming arrays of increasing complexity into the `data` attribute of the `<af-entity>` tag, and this alternative facilitates easier validation.
- When parsing the stored form markup for display, it should be pretty easy to identify `<af-field>` tags within an `<af-entity>` container, then avoid formatting them as displayed form fields, and ensure they're attributed to the correct entity upon submission.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3914Missing getRoleNames() method in WordPress System Utility2022-11-01T08:51:34ZBastien HoMissing getRoleNames() method in WordPress System UtilityOverview
----------------------------------------
Some extensions use the `CRM_Core_Config::singleton()->userSystem->getRoleNames()` method, which is not implemented for WordPressOverview
----------------------------------------
Some extensions use the `CRM_Core_Config::singleton()->userSystem->getRoleNames()` method, which is not implemented for WordPresshttps://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3881Edit fields for invoicing information2022-10-25T11:52:40Zthoni56Edit fields for invoicing informationOverview
----------------------------------------
The form fields for invoicing information (in CiviEvent) seems to be hardcoded. E.g. it lacks company name and email. It does not seem possible to change or amend these fields.
Example u...Overview
----------------------------------------
The form fields for invoicing information (in CiviEvent) seems to be hardcoded. E.g. it lacks company name and email. It does not seem possible to change or amend these fields.
Example use-case
----------------------------------------
1. Create an event and enable web registrations
1. Make invoicing mandatory
2. Make a registration and notice what the only available fields are
Current behaviour
----------------------------------------
Hard coded fields
Proposed behaviour
----------------------------------------
Possiblity to use a profile, or custom form.
Comments
----------------------------------------
There is a StackExchange question around this: https://civicrm.stackexchange.com/questions/42202/how-can-i-add-company-to-billing-pay-later-fields but the proposed "solution" is hard and really not a solution.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3882SearchKit - distinct values should be sorted by id2022-10-25T11:52:13ZvitiusSearchKit - distinct values should be sorted by idWhen we have List of contact name and dont use distinct. On output we get sorted list of names on contact id. And when we want have hyperlinks on contacts name, that works perfectly. But when we use distinct function, on output we get un...When we have List of contact name and dont use distinct. On output we get sorted list of names on contact id. And when we want have hyperlinks on contacts name, that works perfectly. But when we use distinct function, on output we get unsorted list of names. But links on contacts is sorted by contact id. That causes missmatch. First of display name have link to lowest contact id and last of display name have link to highest contact id.
I tried this on version 5.51.1 and 5.55.alpha1. And I tried this on case clients (you need enable multiple case clients) like you can see on images bellow. Also I tried this on event participants, where I use aggregation on event id and display participants names. On both distinct causes bad hyper links.
![image](/uploads/7fd977598194996923ddf3e1a698b261/image.png)
![image](/uploads/ac8b4684a84cc8da39b7179eff4ee749/image.png)https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3895SK/FB: Labelling a SK Form Builder form identically to a packaged search over...2022-10-25T11:48:33ZJonGoldSK/FB: Labelling a SK Form Builder form identically to a packaged search overwrites itIf you create two Search Forms with the same label, the machine name of the second one will automatically be changed. Eg. two forms labelled "Example" will create `afSearchExample` and `afSearchExample1`.
However, if one of the forms i...If you create two Search Forms with the same label, the machine name of the second one will automatically be changed. Eg. two forms labelled "Example" will create `afSearchExample` and `afSearchExample1`.
However, if one of the forms is a packaged form, this is NOT true.
### Steps to Replicate
* Enable an extension that provides a packaged SK form (e.g. CiviGrant provides `afSearchGrants`.
* Create a minimal Search Kit search.
* Create a form from that search and name it `Grants`.
### Expected Result
The new FB form is named `afSearchGrants1` and is separate from the packaged FB search form.
### Actual Result
The new FB form is named `afSearchGrants` and replaces the old form. You can't revert this without CLI access to rename the `.html` and `.json` files in `[civicrm.files]/ang`.
This came about when a client created a new FB search form and named it "Grants", causing their Grants tab to disappear.
I suspect that the naming behavior looks at other files in the same folder, and appends the `1` if it finds a file of the same name. It should be comparing against all `.aff.*` files. It should provide a warning that you're going to replace a core FB form.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3898CiviCRM log triggers don't fire on CASCADE DELETE2022-10-25T11:48:10ZbrienneCiviCRM log triggers don't fire on CASCADE DELETEOverview
----------------------------------------
When there is a CASCADE DELETE on an entity record, it does not trigger the CiviCRM log for the records (such as from a custom field attached to an entity) that are deleted as a result of...Overview
----------------------------------------
When there is a CASCADE DELETE on an entity record, it does not trigger the CiviCRM log for the records (such as from a custom field attached to an entity) that are deleted as a result of the cascade. This behavior makes it difficult to restore custom data from the log tables when the entity it was attached to is deleted and then needs to be restored.
Reproduction steps
----------------------------------------
1. Create a custom field to be *Used For* Grants (**Administer > Custom data and Screens > Custom Fields > Add Set of Custom Fields**)
1. Create a new Grant record and be sure to fill out the custom field(s) (**CiviGrant > New Grant**)
1. Delete the grant record (**CiviGrant Dashboard > View > Delete**)
1. View the log table of the custom field and you will note that there is no delete log_action on the custom field in question
* If using the command line or a SQL editor like DBeaver, you can use the following command to note the lack of the delete action from the custom field civicrm_log table. (*Be sure to change tablename to the actual log table's name*).
```sql
SELECT id, log_date, log_action FROM tablename;
Current behaviour
----------------------------------------
If a record is deleted as a result of a CASCADE DELETE, then the action is not logged in the applicable civicrm_log table.
Expected behaviour
----------------------------------------
The log triggers should fire on records that are deleted, even if as a result of a CASCADE DELETE.
Comments
----------------------------------------
This issue has been previously noted on this [post](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/26328570/on-delete-cascade-not-firing-trigger) on Stack Overflow.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3899Creating a cms user account from a civi org contact converts the org contact ...2022-10-25T11:47:42ZDaveDCreating a cms user account from a civi org contact converts the org contact into an individualThis might be drupal 9 only - it seems ok in drupal 7 but haven't tried any others.
While there have been arguments that [corporations are people](https://www.npr.org/2014/07/28/335288388/when-did-companies-become-people-excavating-the-...This might be drupal 9 only - it seems ok in drupal 7 but haven't tried any others.
While there have been arguments that [corporations are people](https://www.npr.org/2014/07/28/335288388/when-did-companies-become-people-excavating-the-legal-evolution), with some comedy side-benefits, either:
* a civi org contact should stay an org contact when a cms user is created for it (using the actions dropdown on the contact summary - create user record),
* the action shouldn't be allowed
Since it seems to have worked in drupal 7, probably the first one.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3930Managed entity: creating custom fields with same label causes fatal error bec...2022-10-24T09:18:16ZherbdoolManaged entity: creating custom fields with same label causes fatal error because of db index.Overview
----------------------------------------
It seems a bit over the top to have fatal errors when custom field labels are not unique. This would (likely) only appear if someone had a managed entity for the custom field. Or if they...Overview
----------------------------------------
It seems a bit over the top to have fatal errors when custom field labels are not unique. This would (likely) only appear if someone had a managed entity for the custom field. Or if they were using the API directly.
Example use-case
----------------------------------------
1. Create a custom group. Add a custom field.
2. Go to API4, choose CustomField, create. Create a new custom field with the same label.
Current behaviour
----------------------------------------
> DB Error: already exists
Proposed behaviour
----------------------------------------
Remove the index from the database for the label. The custom field index on the name should be enough. The UI will still have validation to prevent duplicate labels, but that's necessary because there's no way to specify the label and name separately in the UI.https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3906FormBuilder URL Filter dropdown with multiple values are only filterd with fi...2022-10-21T07:28:15ZdavidFormBuilder URL Filter dropdown with multiple values are only filterd with first valueOverview
----------------------------------------
If a URL filter with multiple values is used in formbuilder, all values are picked up and shown in the multiselect, but the search is only filterd with the first value.
e.g. /civicrm/for...Overview
----------------------------------------
If a URL filter with multiple values is used in formbuilder, all values are picked up and shown in the multiselect, but the search is only filterd with the first value.
e.g. /civicrm/forms/fzt-suche/#?event_type_id=2,3,4
![Unbenannt](/uploads/10a0f5f22f4acd9aaa2a2912743ae71a/Unbenannt.JPG)
Environment information
----------------------------------------
* __Browser:__ Firefox 105
* __CiviCRM:__ 5.54.0
* __PHP:__ 7.3
* __CMS:__ Drupal 7https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/3911civix upgrade fails on afform extension with mgd mixin incompatible version e...2022-10-21T07:23:20Zaydunsaidan.saunders@squiffle.ukcivix upgrade fails on afform extension with mgd mixin incompatible version errorOn master, go to `civicrm/ext/afform/core` run `civix upgrade`
Error:
```
General upgrade
===============
In Mixlib.php line 147:
Received incompat...On master, go to `civicrm/ext/afform/core` run `civix upgrade`
Error:
```
General upgrade
===============
In Mixlib.php line 147:
Received incompatible version (expected="mgd-php@1.1.0", actual="mgd-php@1.0.0")
```
`info.xml` includes:
```
<mixin>mgd-php@1.1.0</mixin>
```tottentotten