CRM-20993 - API - Extention get - Fix filtering by ID

[tschuettler]

---

• CRM-20993: API - Extension get - Cannot filter by ID anymore
  https://issues.civicrm.org/jira/browse/CRM-20993

Overview

Restore filtering by ID for API Extension get

Before

After

[colemanw]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but extensions don't actually have an "id" do they? So what you're calling "id" here is just an array index and not guaranteed to remain consistent from one api call to the next.
If that's the case then I think "get by id" is false advertising.

[tschuettler]

Yes, that seems kinda true currently. We actually do have an "id" as the PK in the database table for the installed extensions. The label of the parameter is somewhat misleading.
My intention was mainly to restore the functionality from before #9141 where it was possible to filter by id, but i don't really have a use case for this. Back then it was also only filtering by the sequentially generated id from the api call.

Should we just unset all those fields without any meaningfull functionality?

I could implement something to actually filter by extention_id but this may get pretty confusing with the sequential id.

[colemanw]

I'd vote for dropping the fake array index id in favor of the actual id in the database.

[totten]

Some extensions don't have records in the database, so they don't have DB ids.

From the perspective of CRM_Extension_Manager, the three most common statuses are:

• uninstalled ==> the code exists, but there is no record in civicrm_extension
• installed ==> the code exists, and there is a record in civicrm_extension, and it has is_active==1
• disabled ==> the code exists, and there is a record in civicrm_extension, and it has is_active==0

If the API id worked exactly like the DB id, then you'd lose the ability to browse/see the uninstalled extensions.

[tschuettler]

Yes, it seems sensible to keep the current artificial id. Having the uninstalled extension have empty ids would be pretty odd.

[seamuslee001]

@tschuettler can you please run git rebase -i /master on your branch and see if you can squish the fix indentation commit into one of the other two?

[seamuslee001]

you will need to do a git push CRM-20993 -f after the rebase has cleanly finished

[tschuettler]

@seamuslee001 I gave it a try ...

[seamuslee001]

Looks good @tschuettler I'm +1 on the PR as is, the false Id is better for the reasons Tim gives