Add textbox custom fields to the Users entity type

Description

Users have requested the ability to create a lists of users based on custom field, as well as to be able to view this custom field data for user records.

The scope of this story is to add support for string based custom fields of the following types:

  • Textbox short

  • Textbox long 

Field name

Users <custom field name

Users <custom field name>

Data source

type: Textbox short

type: Textbox long

Data type

String

String

Operators/options

 free-entry text

 free-entry text

Default column?

no

no

Any special permissions?

no

no

Notes

N/A

N/A

Requirements:

  1. The following types of string-based custom fields are an available field in the query builder for the users entity type

    1. Textbox short

    2. Textbox long

  2. String-based custom fields are available columns for lists of the users entity type

Scenarios:

  1. Scenario - custom field short textbox

    • Given a custom field with the following properties

      • Name: Quick note

      • Type: Textbox short

    • And User A has a Quick note with a value of X

    • When I query users by Quick note for X 

    • Then user A is returned

  2. Scenario - custom field long textbox

    • Given a custom field with the following properties

      • Name: Long note

      • Type: Textbox long

    • And User A has a Long note with a value of XYZ

    • When I query users by Quick note for XYZ 

    • Then user A is returned

Notes:

As part of the User entity type, we want to support custom fields. The results of the spike for this can be found here: https://ebscoinddev.atlassian.net/l/cp/N3muy2u4

 

Environment

None

Potential Workaround

None

Attachments

2

Checklist

hide

Activity

Show:

Kathleen MooreJanuary 27, 2025 at 12:48 PM

Confirmed the core functionality is working as expected, and the noted bugs that are linked will be fixed in separate tickets

Emma_HaroyanJanuary 27, 2025 at 6:53 AM

Moving the ticket to ‘In review’, as we have separate tickets for mentioned bugs.

Bobby SharpJanuary 24, 2025 at 2:48 PM

Sorry , I should have clarified: we’re now able to handle custom field names being changed, but if the field is deleted entirely, then that situation needs to be handled in the UI. I created this ticket (also linked in the other story) to take care of the situation where the custom field is deleted entirely.

Emma_HaroyanJanuary 24, 2025 at 6:36 AM
Edited

Tested on Snapshot.

The problem I mentioned below is still reproducible when I remove the custom fields((

And about #4, let’s see 's opinion.

Bobby SharpJanuary 23, 2025 at 11:08 PM
Edited

Hi , the issue you mentioned should be fixed now. You can now create a list with a custom field, change the custom field name, and the list should function without breaking or showing any “undefined“ values. A few notes:

  1. You should still be able to refresh the list like normal and see the results as expected, after changing a custom field name.

  2. You should see the updated custom field name in the results.

  3. As mentioned in the other ticket, the “Query“ box in the query builder modal will display the field’s BE name, but this will be updated in a future ticket.

  4. The 1 thing that won’t automatically update is the user-friendly query, which will still show the old custom field name. User-friendly queries are saved with the list, and there is no way to have the user-friendly query automatically update when the custom field name is updated, because there’s nothing in mod-users to notify mod-lists that a custom field has been changed. However, if you edit the list and save it again, the user-friendly query will be updated. If the fact that the user-friendly query doesn’t update immediately is determined to be a big problem, then we could potentially rework user-friendly queries to be calculated on-the-fly instead of saved with the list. But that’s outside the scope of this ticket, and might introduce more problems than it solves. Furthermore, I’d say it’s probably not a huge deal, given that it’s a corner case that would require a user to have a list with a custom field in the query, then change the custom field’s name. This probably wouldn’t be super common, plus it’s easy to fix the query in the list when this does occur, since the list just has to be saved again.

I’m going to move this back into QA, let me know if you notice any other issues!

cc to make sure this all sounds ok

Done

Details

Assignee

Reporter

Priority

Story Points

Sprint

Development Team

Corsair

Fix versions

Release

Sunflower (R1 2025)

TestRail: Cases

Open TestRail: Cases

TestRail: Runs

Open TestRail: Runs

Created July 1, 2024 at 4:09 PM
Updated March 11, 2025 at 7:21 PM
Resolved January 27, 2025 at 12:48 PM
TestRail: Cases
TestRail: Runs