Add more Relationship Types
By Sky Host on Sunday, 18 January 2015
Posted in Feature Requests (Not Supported)
Replies 10
Likes 0
Views 1.3K
Votes 0
Hi SI team,

I need to have a few more relationship types than the ones already available. How do I do that?

I also want to display the relationship status below the profile name on profile.

Thanks in advance
Hi Sky,

I am really sorry for the late reply.
I believe this cannot be done in the current system. However, you can tweak the code to achieved this. You can edit these 2 files:
1. .../components/com_easysocial/themes/frosty/profile/default.header.php'
2. .../components/com_easysocial/themes/frosty/profile/default.php

I am really sorry, we unable to assist you with the customization since our hands are tied with the existing development. If this is a priority, please do post them on our sales sections at https://crm.stackideas.com and our sales department would get back to you with a proper quote.

Regarding your issue on how to add more relationship, currently I believe there is no settings available to do that. However, you can go to this file, and add your relationship there:
.../media/com_easysocial/apps/fields/user/relationship/config/config.json

Hope this can help.
Yasser Ibrahim
·
Monday, 19 January 2015 16:42
·
0 Likes
·
0 Votes
·
0 Comments
·
bump!!
Sky Host
·
Monday, 19 January 2015 13:09
·
0 Likes
·
0 Votes
·
0 Comments
·
Hi Sky,

I am sorry for the late reply.
I not sure what do you mean by more relationship and how do you want it to be displayed below the profile name. Can you please explain more so that we can understand you better?

Please advise.
Yasser Ibrahim
·
Monday, 19 January 2015 13:09
·
0 Likes
·
0 Votes
·
0 Comments
·
Hi Mohd,

thanks for replying. see the attached image.

1) the available status types are single, engaged, married etc. I want to add more, like "Confusing" or "Not interested" etc. just an example.

2) I want to display them on their profile, see the other image attached. I also want to show Location of the person there.
Sky Host
·
Monday, 19 January 2015 13:34
·
0 Likes
·
0 Votes
·
0 Comments
·
bump!!
Sky Host
·
Monday, 19 January 2015 14:58
·
0 Likes
·
0 Votes
·
0 Comments
·
Thank you Mohd.. that was really helpful!
Sky Host
·
Monday, 19 January 2015 17:04
·
0 Likes
·
0 Votes
·
0 Comments
·
Hi Sky,

You're welcome. If you have anymore question, please do not hesitate to ask us by creating a new ticket. Since this ticket is already resolved and we want to minimize the confusion which maybe be occur.

Thanks.
Yasser Ibrahim
·
Monday, 19 January 2015 17:56
·
0 Likes
·
0 Votes
·
0 Comments
·
+1 to this

There are so many variations depending on the usage of EasySocial so it would be better to be able to customise this. As an example, on our site we have people asking for polyamorous to be one of the relationship options. Also some people wish to have the "in a relationship with" option to allow them to show more than one person (sorry of that shocks you but it happens all over the world!)

Also it may be that the relationship is 'brother', 'cousin', 'uncle' etc.
Jay
·
Monday, 14 May 2018 17:10
·
0 Likes
·
0 Votes
·
0 Comments
·
+1

Yes, please !!!

The ability to modify relations types and create multiple relations with different people is so important and can add real value to our social networks and enhance EasySocial as a platform.
Even with Gender Roles Relations there should be possible to add next to "married to" also "ex-married to" or "ex-engadged with"

but as EasySocial is targeted also towards niche social networks it can be so useful if we can add for example:

Family Relations (brother, sister, father ...),
Professional Relations (co-worker with, agent of, assistant to, employed by, student of, ...),
Sport and Games Relations ( sparring partner with, team-member with, instructor of ...)

There are so many applications of this, that can reflect rich real-life relationships far beyond simple "friend"and "married to"

Please, see attached suggestions
Viktor Andreev
·
Tuesday, 11 February 2020 21:26
·
0 Likes
·
0 Votes
·
0 Comments
·
View Full Post