1

Two longstanding inconvenient issues about the search:

  1. it does not locate non-primary emails (see attached)

  2. if you fail to place a space between the lastname, firstname it will not return any results

The feedback I get from users (particularly new ones) is that this is quite flummoxing, while experienced users tend to overlook this as "the way it has been" and not see it as a problem.

enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here

  • 1
    There is a solution for non-primary: civicrm.stackexchange.com/questions/11125/… – petednz - fuzion Oct 5 '18 at 23:40
  • Note that stackexchange format works best when there is only one question per 'question'. Could you revise by creating a second question, maybe providing links to cross reference? – Joe Murray Oct 9 '18 at 21:31
  • The purpose of my post is to meet the requirement for Josh's new "feature requests" GitLab forum, in which he requests we post here first. So I'm confused as to what to do to help others help others, and fear I have only created a mess. But at least the idea is out there now. ;-) – CiviTeacher Oct 10 '18 at 22:04
1

Answer to first question: There is an extension that allows one to seaech for any telephone or email by location: https://github.com/JMAConsulting/biz.jmaconsulting.search.anyteloremail

My guess is that it should still work even though it is only marked as working for 4.5 and 4.4. Please open an issue in github repo if there is a problem and we will update it. To have this search ability added to core searches, I'd recommend getting agreement after opening a gitlab issue.

  • I haven't yet heard a use case for always excluding a non-primary email from a search result. Is there any reason this useful extension (assuming it works with 5.6+) couldn't be a core merge? – CiviTeacher Oct 10 '18 at 22:07
  • Sometimes people want to send only to home or only to office or only to billing, regardless of which is primary. If this were to go into core, I'd suggest refactoring code so that functionality is present in Advanced Search somehow. I suppose it could be added to Search > Custom Search easily. But 5 years ago or more when I reviewed those searches for Lobo most had significant problems and he was iirc thinking of removing the whole area. In any event, dgg and lobo at the time didn't want to add it. – Joe Murray Oct 11 '18 at 16:26

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.