Minor a_b/b_a mixup on case type edit screen

[demeritcowboy]

Overview

This fixes a minor a_b/b_a mixup that came up during this testing.

To reproduce:

1. Create/edit a case type.
2. On the roles tab in the dropdown to add a role start typing something that isn't in the list, like "Spacefleet Commander is".
3. It will suggest (new) beside your typing. Click it.
4. It will open a box to create a new relationship type on the fly. Fill it out.
5. When you save the new relationship type it will add the A to B direction to the table. So far everything is fine.
6. Now try to add the B to A direction to the table. It won't let you because while the table is correct, the dropdown has them mixed up and thinks you're trying to add the same thing that's already in the table.
7. Similarly try to add the A to B direction to the table again. It will make a duplicate, except it's not actually a duplicate it has added the opposite direction now. You can see this if you save and then re-edit the case type.

The affected code is only ever used in this scenario, before you close the case type edit screen, and only for the newly added relationship type. Before the patch the relationship type itself is fine, the rest of the dropdown is fine, and once you close and re-edit the case type the dropdown is also fine including the relationship type you just added earlier. So it's just this one thing in this one place in this one workflow.

Before

Confusing/can add wrong direction

After

Better

Technical Details

Comments

Also adds test which I couldn't add yet during #15378

@alifrumin @agh1

[civibot]

(Standard links)

• If this is your first pull-request for CiviCRM, please browse CONTRIBUTING.md for information about the development and testing processes.
• If you are reviewing this pull-request, you may wish to consult the test sites and the Review Standards (long template, short template).

[alifrumin]

• General standards

  • Explain (r-explain) - PASS : The goal/problem/solution have been adequately explained in the PR.
  • User impact (r-user) - PASS: The change would be intuitive for a majority of users who work with this feature.
  • Documentation (r-doc) - PASS: There are relevant updates for the documentation, or the changes do not require documentation.
  • Run it (r-run) - PASS: I tested by following the instructions of how to reproduce in the "Overview" section. Specifically, I logged into the jenkins build and tested by creating a new case type. Adding a new Relationship Type from the Case Roles options list. Selecting the "Relationship Type Label B to A" instead of A to B and saving. It saved no problem 👍

• Developer standards

  • Technical impact (r-tech) - PASS: The change preserves compatibility with existing callers/code/downstream.
  • Code quality (r-code) - PASS: The functionality, purpose, and style of the code seems clear+sensible.
  • Maintainability (r-maint) - PASS: The change sufficiently improves test coverage, or the change is trivial enough that it does not require tests. -PASS: The change adds a test
  • Test results (r-test) - PASS: The test results are all-clear.

This looks ready to be merged to me 👍

[seamuslee001]

thanks @alifrumin @demeritcowboy

[alifrumin]

that was speedy! Thank you @seamuslee001

[demeritcowboy]

Thanks @alifrumin @seamuslee001