Packaging & Activation for CiviCase

[totten]

We've had a couple projects that involved packaging up a case-type and re-using on different sites -- e.g. we created two extensions for 4.4 ("Legislative Case Types" in https://github.com/civicrm/org.civicrm.legcase/ and "HR Case Types" in https://github.com/civicrm/civihr/tree/master/hrcase/ ). In both cases, we have the following workflow:

• Install CiviCRM
• Install the extension. This automatically loads some SQL/XML files and activates CiviCase (if it's not already activated).

There's an unfortunate by-product of this. If, say, one activates the "HR Case Types" extension, then it *also* activates the example case-types that are bundled with CiviCRM. I think this behavior was put in to make it easier to try out CiviCase, but it's a bit distracting when trying to setup a real installation.

What should we do about it? My ideas so far:

• Do nothing
• As a quick work-around, modify org.civicrm.legcase/org.civicrm.hrcase so that they actively disable the example case-types.
• For Civi 4.5, move the example case-types into an extension.

[nickholden]

I'd agree with moving the examples into an extension. I guess it was felt that CiviCase was so unlike the rest of Civi (needing the xml file and so on) that providing it without examples would make it difficult for people to use. But the examples actually get in the way after you've done your first 2 hours of exploring. So they should be optional.

[lolas]

Tim,

That sounds like a great suggestion. I'm replying to this old thread because it doesn't look like your suggested change is in core yet.
Soon people will probably be downloading various extensions with case types and it will be nicer if they don't have to disable other types.
I think it will be easy to understand the concept of having to download the sample extension.

I also think that now with the new Settings api the global settings in settings.xml could be moved to the DB without losing the benefit of editing version controlled files.

[totten]

OK, I've added an issue to JIRA -- http://issues.civicrm.org/jira/browse/CRM-14255 . Not sure when we'll get to it, but there's a chance someone can do it next week. (If not then, then I don't know when.)