dev/core#2691 - On logging detail civireport show words instead of numbers (part 2)

[demeritcowboy]

Overview

https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/2691

This is a followup to #20844 which only addressed activity record type. This addresses foreign keys, displaying more useful words instead of the foreign key id, e.g. fk activity_id => activity subject or fk contact_id => display_name.

1. Turn on logging at admin - system settings - misc
2. Do something like edit an activity.
3. Go to the Contact Logging Summary report.
4. Drill down on the detail for that change. (Note for activities it will usually say action = Delete, because at the moment the report is only showing activity_contact records not activity records, and civi often does a delete+insert to make an update. I'm only mentioning this because you might be looking for the word Update in the report and not seeing it, but that's separate from making numbers into words.)

Before

Something like this

After

Something like this:

Technical Details

There's metadata available that says if a field is a foreign key and then on the foreign class there's metadata that tells you what would be meaningful to display as a label for that record. So this looks up that label. I'm not sure if there's already an api4 function available that takes a table+field and gets it for you.

For the test I had to work around something that only comes up in tests where logging will always have the same connection id throughout the entire run, whereas in real life on different page requests there'll be a different connection id corresponding to each change. The logging detail report relies on the connection id to tell what db records were associated with a change, so if I don't artificially fiddle with it then it thinks everything that has happened since the start is all one big change.

Comments

[civibot]

(Standard links)

• If this is your first pull-request for CiviCRM, please browse CONTRIBUTING.md for information about the development and testing processes.
• If you are reviewing this pull-request, you may wish to consult the test sites and the Review Standards (long template, short template).

[eileenmcnaughton]

OK - this seems fine - I think you have an interest in this report @sluc23

It does work as it says - and getFieldValue has caching.

My one concern that I have not yet verified is whether the string is adequately escaped on the template

[eileenmcnaughton]

This doesn't change things re my concern so I'll merge & consider that elsewhere

[demeritcowboy]

Word!