CiviCRM Community Forums (archive)

I have been consistently finding that the over-head of creating tables & pages for minor entity-specific settings has been painful. So, I have set up a new extension to manage them https://github.com/eileenmcnaughton/nz.co.fuzion.entitysetting/blob/master/README.md

You can see the api examples here

https://github.com/eileenmcnaughton/nz.co.fuzion.entitysetting/tree/master/api/v3/examples

This means that other extensions don't need to set up a table to store, for example, a new configurable event setting. Within limitations the entity setting will add the configuration fields to the form too. So, for example, this extension adds 2 new settings to a configuration page (alternate page for thank you page & relationship to create if the form is filled out on behalf of someone else (cid=0 in the url)) - it defines the settings

https://github.com/eileenmcnaughton/nz.co.fuzion.frontendpageoptions/blob/master/settings/nz.co.fuzion.frontendpageoptions.contribution_page.entity_setting.php

& they are added to the contribution page configuration & the extension only has to worry about an api call to retrieve them - https://github.com/eileenmcnaughton/nz.co.fuzion.frontendpageoptions/blob/master/frontendpageoptions.php#L146

There are draw-backs to this & they are mostly documented in the README. I don't think that providing this functionality via an extension is a good long-term approach.

BONUS - if you do work on coding or testing contribution or event pages setting them to redirect back to the start / your next page instead of the thank you page is a nice time-saver

How would an option value store that? ie. if I want to add a field to an event that holds an extra string & it might be configured for 1 or 500 events with different strings? For event entity I could create a custom field that extends the event but I can't extend a contribution page, a relationship type or an action schedule - which are the other entities I have needed to extend.

If the field I am adding has options (like the relationship_type field) then I those are being validated by the api but no, not at the sql level. But, I would have to walk a long path to make those validate at the sql level