Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove addressee, email_greeting_id, postal_greeting_id from exposed tokens #19782

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 11, 2021

Conversation

eileenmcnaughton
Copy link
Contributor

@eileenmcnaughton eileenmcnaughton commented Mar 11, 2021

Overview

Per discussion on #19550 (comment)
there appears to be agreement that supporting tokens like
addressee_id (which resolves to '{contact.individual_prefix}{ }.....')
should not be exposed / supported as they seem both unuseful and likely
to be breaky.

Before

image

After

image

Technical Details

These were exposed unintentionally as part of a change to make them
available as WHERE filters on apiv3
54e389a

The discussion suggests that by contrast we should
add support to hash in the token compat subscriber

Comments

@civibot
Copy link

civibot bot commented Mar 11, 2021

(Standard links)

@civibot civibot bot added the master label Mar 11, 2021
@eileenmcnaughton eileenmcnaughton changed the title Remove addressee, email_greeting_id, postal_greeting_id from exposed … Remove addressee, email_greeting_id, postal_greeting_id from exposed tokens Mar 11, 2021
…tokens

Per discussion on civicrm#19550 (comment)
there appears to be agreement that supporting tokens like
addressee_id (which resolves to '{contact.individual_prefix}{ }.....')
should not be exposed / supported as they seem both unuseful and likely
to be breaky.

These were exposed unintentionally as part of a change to make them
available as WHERE filters on apiv3
civicrm@54e389a

The discussion suggests that by contrast we should
add support to hash in the token compat subscriber
@colemanw
Copy link
Member

Those <export> tags are a mess. They do too much, like a lot of our legacy code in which a single function does a & b & c & d and then there end up being hacks all over the place calling the function but then manually undoing c & a, or bugs where the function was called but the caller was only expecting a & b and didn't think about the side-effects of c &d.

@eileenmcnaughton eileenmcnaughton merged commit d5a0c3c into civicrm:master Mar 11, 2021
@eileenmcnaughton eileenmcnaughton deleted the token branch March 11, 2021 19:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants