Add Klarna Source

[cjavilla-stripe]

r? @remi-stripe
cc @stripe/api-libraries

I want to submit the Klarna and SourceOrder stuff separately here. Did I get these references right?

[remi-stripe]

Thanks for the detailed work. Here's what I'd recommend:

• Remove all docs. They are partial which is not great and since this will move to PaymentMethod I'd rather leave it empty. Otherwise, clean up the ISO mention to just be shorter and factual (up to you)
• Add SourceOrder and Shipping in the same PR because it's all related

[cjavilla-stripe]

r? @remi-stripe

Thanks for taking a look...

Couple of questions:

1. should Order be SourceSourceOrder or just Order like in Java https://github.com/stripe/stripe-java/pull/800/files ? (following from that OrderShippingOptions, OrderItem etc.)
2. should Order Item Type be an enum? I can't remember if we use enums in this language.
3. I removed some of the docs for that Klarna type, but expected we would want the docs on these Source Order types. Should we keep those doc strings?

[remi-stripe]

should Order be SourceSourceOrder or just Order like in Java https://github.com/stripe/stripe-java/pull/800/files ? (following from that OrderShippingOptions, OrderItem etc.)

We don't nest classes so it can't be Order otherwise it would conflict as they are in the same namespace. It has to be SourceSourceOrder like in go

should Order Item Type be an enum? I can't remember if we use enums in this language.

No enums for now, not until we auto-generate the library.

I removed some of the docs for that Klarna type, but expected we would want the docs on these Source Order types. Should we keep those doc strings?

I usually put the docs if they are in the API reference, otherwise I don't

[remi-stripe]

minor changes. Please re-assign to @ob-stripe after that so that he can review and approve

[remi-stripe]

There's ChargeShippingOptions for this (the name is definitely not great but that's what we use in other places). Not sure what the best approach is here :(
Having a custom options one when the resource one is generic is weird. But maybe a problem from another time. Will defer to @ob-stripe on that one.

[cjavilla-stripe]

Updated.

r? @remi-stripe

ptal

[remi-stripe]

LGTM, assigning to @ob-stripe to be safe

[ob-stripe]

This attribute is flagged as nullable in the spec, so should be long?.

[cjavilla-stripe]

Updated to nullable.

[ob-stripe]

This attribute is not flagged as nullable in the spec, so should be long (though maybe we can keep it nullable anyway to avoid a future breaking change... @remi-stripe wdyt?).

[remi-stripe]

I'd be fine with not nullable since Amount is not nullable

[remi-stripe]

Ha Amount is nullable, so we should make Quantity nullable
and also ask why one can be and not the other

[cjavilla-stripe]

How would I figure out who to ask why quantity is not nullable in the spec?

[cjavilla-stripe]

r? @ob-stripe

I think this one is ready for another look. Squashed, so the comments may have lost context, but I think we're good with one action item to ask why source order item quantity is not nullable in the spec.

[ob-stripe]

lgtm