Show manually added Smart Groups on Contact edit

[larssandergreen]

Before

Smart Groups to which a Contact has been manually added are not shown on Contact edit (the edit form, not the Contact Groups tab).

After

Manually added Smart Groups are shown - and Contacts can be removed from them.

[civibot]

(Standard links)

• If you are reviewing this pull-request, you may wish to consult the test sites and the Review Standards (long template, short template).

[seamuslee001]

@johntwyman are you able to test this on the AUG instance for performance reasons?

[larssandergreen]

@seamuslee001 This only touches group, group_contact and subscription_history, so I don't think we should see any significant performance issues. The difference is just not adding AND saved_search_id IS NULL to the query.

If you're concerned about smart group caching, this wouldn't touch that at all.

[colemanw]

@larssandergreen will this cause the group to show up twice (once in the "Regular Groups" section and once under "Smart Groups")?

[larssandergreen]

@colemanw This is just the edit form, not the contact groups tab, if that's what you're asking about (updated up top to clarify).

On the edit form, you only get non-smart groups currently, this PR would also show smart groups to which the contact has been manually added. Otherwise, we get inconsistencies, like the groups that show up on the contact groups tab, which include the manually-added smart groups, are different from the groups that show up on the edit form. Also, you can add a contact to a smart group on the edit form, but then if you save it and return to the form, that group doesn't appear in the list of groups even though the contact has actually been manually added.

It's already the case in core that these groups do show up twice on the contact groups tab, once in the regular groups, once in the smart groups. It's a bit weird, but then the manually-added to smart group thing is weird. I think it probably would make sense to remove them from the smart group listing, but that's out of scope here.

[colemanw]

Ok that makes sense. Thanks.