accept array of case_type_ids when finding available case statuses

[ufundo]

Overview

Chain selects from case_type_id => case status are broken because the Case BAO breaks ignores when passed an array of case_type_ids.

Example afform for a search of Cases

<div af-fieldset="">
  <af-field name="case_type_id" defn="{input_attrs: {multiple: false}}" />
  <af-field name="status_id" defn="{input_type: 'ChainSelect', input_attrs: {multiple: true, control_field: 'case_type_id'}}" />

  <crm-search-display-table search-name="Case_Search_by_Standalone_Admin" display-name=""></crm-search-display-table>
</div>

Before

The case statuses aren't restricted.

After

Works as expected (with #29662 )

Comments

• I originally hit this on 5.69 where it exploded rather than just ignored (before the is_scalar check was introduced)... so less of an issue now.
• @colemanw expressed concern about the cost of unserializing all the Case Type definitions from XML... see discussion here: CiviCase - Fix crash when fetching status_id pseudoconstant #28957
• wouldn't it be dreamy if the definition wasn't stored in XML? or could implement some cacheing at API4 layer? obviously a bigger undertaking...

[civibot]

🤖 Thank you for contributing to CiviCRM! ❤️ We will need to test and review this PR. 👷

Introduction for new contributors...

• If this is your first PR, an admin will greenlight automated testing with the command ok to test or add to whitelist.
• A series of tests will automatically run. You can see the results at the bottom of this page (if there are any problems, it will include a link to see what went wrong).
• A demo site will be built where anyone can try out a version of CiviCRM that includes your changes.
• If this process needs to be repeated, an admin will issue the command test this please to rerun tests and build a new demo site.
• Before this PR can be merged, it needs to be reviewed. Please keep in mind that reviewers are volunteers, and their response time can vary from a few hours to a few weeks depending on their availability and their knowledge of this particular part of CiviCRM.
• A great way to speed up this process is to "trade reviews" with someone - find an open PR that you feel able to review, and leave a comment like "I'm reviewing this now, could you please review mine?" (include a link to yours). You don't have to wait for a response to get started (and you don't have to stop at one!) the more you review, the faster this process goes for everyone 😄
• To ensure that you are credited properly in the final release notes, please add yourself to contributor-key.yml
• For more information about contributing, see CONTRIBUTING.md.

Quick links for reviewers...

• ➡️ PR Demo site (can be rebuilt with the command test this please).
• 📖 Review standards
• 🗒️ Review template (brief or verbose)

➡️ Online demo of this PR 🔗

[ufundo]

accepted those suggestions @colemanw - thanks!

how do you feel about the performance issue?

[ufundo]

Rebased onto master because it includes merged #29662

[colemanw]

@ufundo looks good. I think the performance thing might need to be revisited but not a blocker to this PR.