caseTypeNames = CRM_Case_PseudoConstant::caseType('name');
$this->xmlRepo = CRM_Case_XMLRepository::singleton();
}
/**
* @inheritDoc
*/
public function isEnabled() {
return CRM_Case_BAO_Case::enabled();
}
/**
* Check that the case-type names don't rely on double-munging.
*
* @return CRM_Utils_Check_Message[]
* An empty array, or a list of warnings
*/
public function checkCaseTypeNameConsistency() {
$messages = [];
foreach ($this->caseTypeNames as $caseTypeName) {
$normalFile = $this->xmlRepo->findXmlFile($caseTypeName);
$mungedFile = $this->xmlRepo->findXmlFile(CRM_Case_XMLProcessor::mungeCaseType($caseTypeName));
if ($normalFile && $mungedFile && $normalFile == $mungedFile) {
// ok
}
elseif ($normalFile && $mungedFile) {
$messages[] = new CRM_Utils_Check_Message(
__FUNCTION__ . $caseTypeName,
ts('Case type "%1" has duplicate XML files ("%2" and "%3")', [
1 => $caseTypeName,
2 => $normalFile,
3 => $mungedFile,
]) .
'
' .
ts('Read more about this warning') .
'',
ts('CiviCase'),
\Psr\Log\LogLevel::WARNING,
'fa-puzzle-piece'
);
}
elseif ($normalFile && !$mungedFile) {
// ok
}
elseif (!$normalFile && $mungedFile) {
$messages[] = new CRM_Utils_Check_Message(
__FUNCTION__ . $caseTypeName,
ts('Case type "%1" corresponds to XML file ("%2") The XML file should be named "%3".', [
1 => $caseTypeName,
2 => $mungedFile,
3 => "{$caseTypeName}.xml",
]) .
'
' .
ts('Read more about this warning') .
'',
ts('CiviCase'),
\Psr\Log\LogLevel::WARNING,
'fa-puzzle-piece'
);
}
elseif (!$normalFile && !$mungedFile) {
// ok -- probably a new or DB-based CaseType
}
}
return $messages;
}
/**
* Check that the timestamp columns are populated. (CRM-20958)
*
* @return CRM_Utils_Check_Message[]
* An empty array, or a list of warnings
*/
public function checkNullTimestamps() {
$messages = [];
$nullCount = 0;
$nullCount += CRM_Utils_SQL_Select::from('civicrm_activity')
->where('created_date IS NULL OR modified_date IS NULL')
->select('COUNT(*)')
->execute()
->fetchValue();
$nullCount += CRM_Utils_SQL_Select::from('civicrm_case')
->where('created_date IS NULL OR modified_date IS NULL')
->select('COUNT(*)')
->execute()
->fetchValue();
if ($nullCount > 0) {
$messages[] = new CRM_Utils_Check_Message(
__FUNCTION__,
'' .
ts('The tables "civicrm_activity" and "civicrm_case" were updated to support two new fields, "created_date" and "modified_date". For historical data, these fields may appear blank. (%1 records have NULL timestamps.)', [
1 => $nullCount,
]) .
'
' .
ts('At time of writing, this is not a problem. However, future extensions and improvements could rely on these fields, so it may be useful to back-fill them.') .
'
' .
ts('For further discussion, please visit %1', [
1 => sprintf('%s', self::DOCTOR_WHEN, self::DOCTOR_WHEN),
]) .
'
',
ts('Timestamps for Activities and Cases'),
\Psr\Log\LogLevel::NOTICE,
'fa-clock-o'
);
}
return $messages;
}
/**
* Check that the relationship types aren't going to cause problems.
*
* @return CRM_Utils_Check_Message[]
* An empty array, or a list of warnings
*/
public function checkRelationshipTypeProblems() {
$messages = [];
/**
* There's no use-case to have two different relationship types
* with the same machine name, and it will cause problems because the
* system might match up the wrong type when comparing to xml.
* A single bi-directional one CAN and probably does have the same
* name_a_b and name_b_a and that's ok.
*/
$dao = CRM_Core_DAO::executeQuery("SELECT rt1.*, rt2.id AS id2, rt2.name_a_b AS nameab2, rt2.name_b_a AS nameba2 FROM civicrm_relationship_type rt1 INNER JOIN civicrm_relationship_type rt2 ON (rt1.name_a_b = rt2.name_a_b OR rt1.name_a_b = rt2.name_b_a) WHERE rt1.id <> rt2.id");
while ($dao->fetch()) {
$messages[] = new CRM_Utils_Check_Message(
__FUNCTION__ . $dao->id . "dupe1",
ts("Relationship type %1 has the same internal machine name as another type.
| ID | name_a_b | name_b_a |
|---|
| %2 | %3 | %4 |
| %5 | %6 | %7 |
", [
1 => htmlspecialchars($dao->label_a_b),
2 => $dao->id,
3 => htmlspecialchars($dao->name_a_b),
4 => htmlspecialchars($dao->name_b_a),
5 => $dao->id2,
6 => htmlspecialchars($dao->nameab2),
7 => htmlspecialchars($dao->nameba2),
]) .
'
' .
ts('Read more about this warning') .
'',
ts('Relationship Type Internal Name Duplicates'),
\Psr\Log\LogLevel::ERROR,
'fa-exchange'
);
}
// Ditto for labels
$dao = CRM_Core_DAO::executeQuery("SELECT rt1.*, rt2.id AS id2, rt2.label_a_b AS labelab2, rt2.label_b_a AS labelba2 FROM civicrm_relationship_type rt1 INNER JOIN civicrm_relationship_type rt2 ON (rt1.label_a_b = rt2.label_a_b OR rt1.label_a_b = rt2.label_b_a) WHERE rt1.id <> rt2.id");
while ($dao->fetch()) {
$messages[] = new CRM_Utils_Check_Message(
__FUNCTION__ . $dao->id . "dupe2",
ts("Relationship type %1 has the same display label as another type.
| ID | label_a_b | label_b_a |
|---|
| %2 | %3 | %4 |
| %5 | %6 | %7 |
", [
1 => htmlspecialchars($dao->label_a_b),
2 => $dao->id,
3 => htmlspecialchars($dao->label_a_b),
4 => htmlspecialchars($dao->label_b_a),
5 => $dao->id2,
6 => htmlspecialchars($dao->labelab2),
7 => htmlspecialchars($dao->labelba2),
]) .
'
' .
ts('Read more about this warning') .
'',
ts('Relationship Type Display Label Duplicates'),
\Psr\Log\LogLevel::ERROR,
'fa-exchange'
);
}
/**
* If the name of one type matches the label of another type, there may
* also be problems. This can happen if for example you initially set
* it up and then keep changing your mind adding and deleting and renaming
* a couple times in a certain order.
*/
$dao = CRM_Core_DAO::executeQuery("SELECT rt1.*, rt2.id AS id2, rt2.name_a_b AS nameab2, rt2.name_b_a AS nameba2, rt2.label_a_b AS labelab2, rt2.label_b_a AS labelba2 FROM civicrm_relationship_type rt1 INNER JOIN civicrm_relationship_type rt2 ON (rt1.name_a_b = rt2.label_a_b OR rt1.name_b_a = rt2.label_a_b OR rt1.name_a_b = rt2.label_b_a OR rt1.name_b_a = rt2.label_b_a) WHERE rt1.id <> rt2.id");
// No point displaying the same matching id twice, which can happen with
// the query.
$ids = [];
while ($dao->fetch()) {
if (isset($ids[$dao->id2])) {
continue;
}
$ids[$dao->id] = $dao->id;
$messages[] = new CRM_Utils_Check_Message(
__FUNCTION__ . $dao->id . "dupe3",
ts("Relationship type %1 has an internal machine name that is the same as the display label as another type.
| ID | name_a_b | name_b_a | label_a_b | label_b_a |
|---|
| %2 | %3 | %4 | %5 | %6 |
| %7 | %8 | %9 | %10 | %11 |
", [
1 => htmlspecialchars($dao->label_a_b),
2 => $dao->id,
3 => htmlspecialchars($dao->name_a_b),
4 => htmlspecialchars($dao->name_b_a),
5 => htmlspecialchars($dao->label_a_b),
6 => htmlspecialchars($dao->label_b_a),
7 => $dao->id2,
8 => htmlspecialchars($dao->nameab2),
9 => htmlspecialchars($dao->nameab2),
10 => htmlspecialchars($dao->labelab2),
11 => htmlspecialchars($dao->labelba2),
]) .
'
' .
ts('Read more about this warning') .
'',
ts('Relationship Type Cross-Duplication'),
\Psr\Log\LogLevel::WARNING,
'fa-exchange'
);
}
/**
* Check that ones that appear to be unidirectional don't have the same
* machine name for both a_b and b_a. This can happen for example if you
* forget to fill in the b_a label when creating, then go back and edit.
*/
$dao = CRM_Core_DAO::executeQuery("SELECT rt1.* FROM civicrm_relationship_type rt1 WHERE rt1.name_a_b = rt1.name_b_a AND rt1.label_a_b <> rt1.label_b_a");
while ($dao->fetch()) {
$messages[] = new CRM_Utils_Check_Message(
__FUNCTION__ . $dao->id . "ambiguousname",
ts("Relationship type %1 appears to be unidirectional, but has the same internal machine name for both sides.
| ID | name_a_b | name_b_a | label_a_b | label_b_a |
|---|
| %2 | %3 | %4 | %5 | %6 |
", [
1 => htmlspecialchars($dao->label_a_b),
2 => $dao->id,
3 => htmlspecialchars($dao->name_a_b),
4 => htmlspecialchars($dao->name_b_a),
5 => htmlspecialchars($dao->label_a_b),
6 => htmlspecialchars($dao->label_b_a),
]) .
'
' .
ts('Read more about this warning') .
'',
ts('Relationship Type Ambiguity'),
\Psr\Log\LogLevel::WARNING,
'fa-exchange'
);
}
/**
* Check that ones that appear to be unidirectional don't have the same
* label for both a_b and b_a. This can happen for example if you
* created it as unidirectional, then edited it later trying to make it
* bidirectional.
*/
$dao = CRM_Core_DAO::executeQuery("SELECT rt1.* FROM civicrm_relationship_type rt1 WHERE rt1.label_a_b = rt1.label_b_a AND rt1.name_a_b <> rt1.name_b_a");
while ($dao->fetch()) {
$messages[] = new CRM_Utils_Check_Message(
__FUNCTION__ . $dao->id . "ambiguouslabel",
ts("Relationship type %1 appears to be unidirectional internally, but has the same display label for both sides. Possibly you created it initially as unidirectional and then made it bidirectional later.
| ID | name_a_b | name_b_a | label_a_b | label_b_a |
|---|
| %2 | %3 | %4 | %5 | %6 |
", [
1 => htmlspecialchars($dao->label_a_b),
2 => $dao->id,
3 => htmlspecialchars($dao->name_a_b),
4 => htmlspecialchars($dao->name_b_a),
5 => htmlspecialchars($dao->label_a_b),
6 => htmlspecialchars($dao->label_b_a),
]) .
'
' .
ts('Read more about this warning') .
'',
ts('Relationship Type Ambiguity'),
\Psr\Log\LogLevel::WARNING,
'fa-exchange'
);
}
/**
* Check for missing roles listed in the xml but not defined as
* relationship types.
*/
// Don't use database since might be in xml files.
$caseTypes = civicrm_api3('CaseType', 'get', [
'options' => ['limit' => 0],
])['values'];
// Don't use pseudoconstant since want all and also name and label.
$relationshipTypes = civicrm_api3('RelationshipType', 'get', [
'options' => ['limit' => 0],
])['values'];
$allConfigured = array_column($relationshipTypes, 'id', 'name_a_b')
+ array_column($relationshipTypes, 'id', 'name_b_a')
+ array_column($relationshipTypes, 'id', 'label_a_b')
+ array_column($relationshipTypes, 'id', 'label_b_a');
$missing = [];
foreach ($caseTypes as $caseType) {
foreach ($caseType['definition']['caseRoles'] ?? [] as $role) {
if (!isset($allConfigured[$role['name']])) {
$missing[$role['name']] = $role['name'];
}
}
}
if (!empty($missing)) {
$tableRows = [];
foreach ($relationshipTypes as $relationshipType) {
$tableRows[] = ts('| %1 | %2 | %3 | %4 | %5 |
', [
1 => $relationshipType['id'],
2 => htmlspecialchars($relationshipType['name_a_b']),
3 => htmlspecialchars($relationshipType['name_b_a']),
4 => htmlspecialchars($relationshipType['label_a_b']),
5 => htmlspecialchars($relationshipType['label_b_a']),
]);
}
$messages[] = new CRM_Utils_Check_Message(
__FUNCTION__ . "missingroles",
ts("The following roles listed in your case type definitions do not match any relationship type defined in the system: %1.
"
. "This might be because of a mismatch if you are using external xml files to manage case types. If using xml files, then use either the name_a_b or name_b_a value from the following table. (Out of the box you would use name_b_a, which lists them on the case from the client perspective.) If you are not using xml files, you can edit your case types at Administer - CiviCase - Case Types.
"
. "
| ID | name_a_b | name_b_a | label_a_b | label_b_a |
|---|
"
. implode("\n", $tableRows)
. "
", [
1 => htmlspecialchars(implode(', ', $missing)),
]) .
'
' .
ts('Read more about this warning') .
'',
ts('Missing Roles'),
\Psr\Log\LogLevel::ERROR,
'fa-exclamation'
);
}
return $messages;
}
/**
* Check any xml definitions stored as external files to see if they
* have label as the role and where the label is different from the name.
* We don't have to think about edge cases because there are already
* status checks above for those.
*
* @return CRM_Utils_Check_Message[]
* An empty array, or a list of warnings
*/
public function checkExternalXmlFileRoleNames() {
$messages = [];
// Get config for relationship types
$relationship_types = civicrm_api3('RelationshipType', 'get', [
'options' => ['limit' => 0],
])['values'];
// keyed on name, with id as the value, e.g. 'Case Coordinator is' => 10
$names_a_b = array_column($relationship_types, 'id', 'name_a_b');
$names_b_a = array_column($relationship_types, 'id', 'name_b_a');
$labels_a_b = array_column($relationship_types, 'id', 'label_a_b');
$labels_b_a = array_column($relationship_types, 'id', 'label_b_a');
$dao = CRM_Core_DAO::executeQuery("SELECT id FROM civicrm_case_type WHERE definition IS NULL OR definition=''");
while ($dao->fetch()) {
$case_type = civicrm_api3('CaseType', 'get', [
'id' => $dao->id,
])['values'][$dao->id];
if (empty($case_type['definition'])) {
$messages[] = new CRM_Utils_Check_Message(
__FUNCTION__ . "missingcasetypedefinition",
'' . ts('Unable to locate xml file for Case Type "%1".',
[
1 => htmlspecialchars(empty($case_type['title']) ? $dao->id : $case_type['title']),
]) . '
',
ts('Missing Case Type Definition'),
\Psr\Log\LogLevel::ERROR,
'fa-exclamation'
);
continue;
}
if (empty($case_type['definition']['caseRoles'])) {
$messages[] = new CRM_Utils_Check_Message(
__FUNCTION__ . "missingcaseroles",
'' . ts('CaseRoles seems to be missing in the xml file for Case Type "%1".',
[
1 => htmlspecialchars(empty($case_type['title']) ? $dao->id : $case_type['title']),
]) . '
',
ts('Missing Case Roles'),
\Psr\Log\LogLevel::ERROR,
'fa-exclamation'
);
continue;
}
// Loop thru each role in the xml.
foreach ($case_type['definition']['caseRoles'] as $role) {
$name_to_suggest = NULL;
$xml_name = $role['name'];
if (isset($names_a_b[$xml_name]) || isset($names_b_a[$xml_name])) {
// It matches a name, so either name and label are the same or it's
// an edge case already dealt with by core status checks, so do
// nothing.
continue;
}
elseif (isset($labels_b_a[$xml_name])) {
// $labels_b_a[$xml_name] gives us the id, so then look up name_b_a
// from the original relationship_types array which is keyed on id.
// We do b_a first because it's the more standard one, although it
// will only make a difference in edge cases which we leave to the
// other checks.
$name_to_suggest = $relationship_types[$labels_b_a[$xml_name]]['name_b_a'];
}
elseif (isset($labels_a_b[$xml_name])) {
$name_to_suggest = $relationship_types[$labels_a_b[$xml_name]]['name_a_b'];
}
// If it didn't match any name or label then that's weird.
if (empty($name_to_suggest)) {
$messages[] = new CRM_Utils_Check_Message(
__FUNCTION__ . "invalidcaserole",
'' . ts('CaseRole "%1" in the xml file for Case Type "%2" doesn\'t seem to match any existing relationship type.',
[
1 => htmlspecialchars($xml_name),
2 => htmlspecialchars(empty($case_type['title']) ? $dao->id : $case_type['title']),
]) . '
',
ts('Invalid Case Role'),
\Psr\Log\LogLevel::ERROR,
'fa-exclamation'
);
}
else {
$messages[] = new CRM_Utils_Check_Message(
__FUNCTION__ . "suggestedchange",
'' . ts('Please edit the XML file for case type "%2" so that the case role label "%1" is changed to its corresponding name "%3". Using label is deprecated as of version 5.20.',
[
1 => htmlspecialchars($xml_name),
2 => htmlspecialchars(empty($case_type['title']) ? $dao->id : $case_type['title']),
3 => htmlspecialchars($name_to_suggest),
]) . '
',
ts('Case Role using display label instead of internal machine name'),
\Psr\Log\LogLevel::WARNING,
'fa-code'
);
}
}
}
return $messages;
}
}