"Advanced Settings" Checkbox/Fieldset

I concur with this opinion. The argument field is probably seldom used. Will look into it. Thanks.

+1 for marking fields as advanced.

I would like to suggest to make the 'Include View Title' checkbox optional as well. When using paragraphs we add a separate title field which makes the checkbox confusing for end users.

I think all the new options should go in the advanced settings fieldset, only view and display should be seen outside it.

If all fields except view / display ID would be configurable per field instance, an advanced fieldset might not be needed. You could just only enable fields that your user would understand?

I agree it's needed less if we are configuring the ability to use the settings per field instance, but it might make it look a bit cleaner if they are in a fieldset.

We might also want the options where we configure these on the field instance to be in a fieldset too? Just thinking if there's going to be a list of all views and displays then it's quite a lot of settings anyway. I think the View reference field does a good job of this in their field settings.

This is created and in dev now. Please test on both autocomplete and select widgets using arguments and title.

Settings like title and argument can now be hidden for each field instance in the 2.x branch. I thinks this solves the issue. Please correct me if I'm wrong. For now marking as fixed.

Setting back to needs review. This is the last item that needs community review before I do an rc1 release for 1.x. I agree it is in the 2.x release but this refers to the code in the current release.

Alternatively, I could remove it from the current release so that it is only present in the 2.x where it will get the testing that it probably needs before release. That might be the safest option.

It is possible to add the same hidden_settings option for the field instance done in 2.x to 1.x for the title/argument field. I would prefer closing this as won't fix for 1.x though. If needed people could upgrade to 2.x, in the end that's probably where our efforts should be focused.

If someone wants to write a patch though, I see no reason not to add it to 1.x.

I think you missed the gist of the ticket which refers to the Advanced settings Fieldset/Details

$element['options'] = array(
      '#type' => 'details',
      '#title' => t('Options'),
      '#weight' => 10,
    );

I have already merged that to 1.x dev. I did this because I expected that the module would need that in place before addition of the advanced options module. Now that I can see what form the advanced options actually come in, then it becomes less important to get it in.

I've decided to leave the Details element in the 1.x branch. I'll wait a few days to see if there are any problems related to it, since the same code is in 2.x as well. Then I'll push the rc1 on 1.x and apply for security advisory.

I see, moving the options to a closed fieldset already helps! Allowing users to remove the title/argument options is another issue. Sorry about that!

+1 for the extra details element. I believe hiding the extra options by default helps a lot for non-experienced editors.