dev/core/issues/322 - fix JS error on contribution page, completing form…

[davejenx]

…on behalf of someone else, when profile includes checkbox field.

See https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/issues/322 .

Overview

On a contribution page, when "completing this form on behalf of someone else", a JavaScript syntax error occurs when the page includes a profile with a checkbox field and the contact has this field checked. This PR fixes that.

Replicated on demo site. Steps to replicate:

1. Create a custom field, Test Checkbox: Alphanumeric, CheckBox with 1 option: label "I agree", value 1.
2. Create a profile including this field.
3. Include this profile on a contribution page.
4. Edit Contact A and check the "I agree" checkbox.
5. On the contribution page, click "Not demo test, or want to do this for a different person?"
6. Choose Contact A.

Before

JavaScript error: "Syntax error, unrecognized expression: [name=custom_13[1]]".
Form does not populate with Contact A's data.

After

Form populates with Contact A's data.

Technical Details

Simple JS fix: ensure name attribute is properly quoted.

[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]

@davejenx this looks like a regression from the security release (5.3.2) are you able to confirm?

[davejenx]

@eileenmcnaughton I have replicated the issue on 4.7.31, so evidently not a regression from the security release.

[eileenmcnaughton]

thanks @davejenx

[jitendrapurohit]

Have quickly replicated with the steps mentioned in the description and can confirm that this fixes the js issue displayed in the console.

Thanks @davejenx

[davejenx]

Thanks, @jitendrapurohit !

[seamuslee001]

Merging as per review from @jitendrapurohit

[eileenmcnaughton]

@jitendrapurohit @davejenx @seamuslee001 I just closed the issue against 5.6 - keep an eye on this as we are missing that step a bit

[davejenx]

Thanks @seamuslee001 & @eileenmcnaughton !