Update contribution transact code to use version from contributiontransactlegacy extension #437
Conversation
| /** | ||
| * Adjust Metadata for Transact action. | ||
| * | ||
| * The metadata is used for setting defaults, documentation & validation. | ||
| * | ||
| * @param array $params | ||
| * Array of parameters determined by getfields. | ||
| */ | ||
| function _wf_civicrm_api3_contribution_transact_spec(&$params) { | ||
| $fields = civicrm_api3('Contribution', 'getfields', ['action' => 'create']); | ||
| $params = array_merge($params, $fields['values']); | ||
| $params['receive_date']['api.default'] = 'now'; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@KarinG Why did you include this in the original PR? I don't think it is relevant?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh that was just a copy/paste. I noticed you had that in your replacement Extension as well and figured it may be useful.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It won't do anything except in the context of API3 so not needed here.
|
Downloading the browser artifacts (hit Details on test that failed): Then looking through the HTML output -> FunctionalJavascript_ContributionPageTest-8-11138688.html -> shows this: |
|
|
||
| $paymentProcessor = \CRM_Financial_BAO_PaymentProcessor::getPayment($params['payment_processor'], $params['payment_processor_mode']); | ||
| $paymentProcessor['object']->doPayment($params); | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, it's called via PaymentProcessor.Pay API.
|
|
||
| $reflectionClass = new ReflectionClass($propertyBag); | ||
| $reflectionProperty = $reflectionClass->getProperty('props'); | ||
| $reflectionProperty->setAccessible(TRUE); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is ReflectionClass()?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Have now added a comment to the code. It's a way of accessing protected vars/methods in a class because civicrm/civicrm-core#17507 has not (yet) been merged... We need PropertyBag as an array and this gets it.
mattwire
force-pushed
the
8legacytransact
branch
from
654bc54
to
a39a0eb
Compare
…nsactlegacy extension
mattwire
force-pushed
the
8legacytransact
branch
from
77829ef
to
be9ac14
Compare
|
Excellent @mattwire - looks like you have the ContributionPageTest ✅ working! I'll have a look later today or tomorrow - specifically at invoiceIDs. Do you have access to a 'live' test account for Stripe (like I have for iATS) so that you can add a Functional Javascript Test? Copy ContributionPageTest to ContributionPageStripeTest -> i.e. make a new one for Stripe specifically. It would be awesome to ensure we have iATS and Stripe coverage for D8 & D9! |
|
I did a test with iATS 1stPay (JS) - payment processor and that also worked well - documenting:
|
|
Ok merging this - assuming that will make it easier for you to add a Summary - this PR passes automated tests for:
And manual tests for:
|
Overview
Follow up to #434
Before
Using same code as core which doesn't really follow "good practise" for payments.
After
Use code from contributiontransactlegacy extension which is updated to follow "good practise" for payments.
Technical Details
Comments
Note I didn't test this yet..