fix: change facade method for eligible address determination (#98413) #1701
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
✅ Successfully linked to Azure Boards work item(s): |
SGrueber
approved these changes
Aug 1, 2024
SGrueber
deleted the
fix/wrong-estimation-of-eligible-addresses-after-login
branch
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
PR Type
[x ] Bugfix
[ ] Feature
[ ] Code style update (formatting, local variables)
[ ] Refactoring (no functional changes, no API changes)
[ ] Build-related changes
[ ] CI-related changes
[ ] Documentation content changes
[ ] Application / infrastructure changes
[ ] Other:
What Is the Current Behavior?
After user login on the checkout address page the determination of the eligible addresses failed. The reason for this that the corresponding rest request is executed against the wrong basket.
Issue Number: Closes #98413
Does this PR Introduce a Breaking Change?
[ ] Yes
[x ] No
AB#98417