New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat(FRM): Revise post FRM core flows #4394
Merged
Merged
Changes from 24 commits
Commits
Show all changes
28 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
e960e0c
revise post frm core flows
srujanchikke 785ee7f
Merge branch 'main' of github.com:juspay/hyperswitch into frm_core_flows
srujanchikke 1cb716c
chore: run formatter
hyperswitch-bot[bot] e790e6e
fix clippy
srujanchikke f99e030
Merge branch 'main' of github.com:juspay/hyperswitch into frm_core_flows
srujanchikke 164fbb8
Merge branch 'frm_core_flows' of github.com:juspay/hyperswitch into f…
srujanchikke 069baca
chore: run formatter
hyperswitch-bot[bot] b8c5821
refactor approve incase of manual capture
srujanchikke c975c55
Merge branch 'main' of github.com:juspay/hyperswitch into frm_core_flows
srujanchikke 08da3ea
Merge branch 'frm_core_flows' of github.com:juspay/hyperswitch into f…
srujanchikke 3fa28af
chore: run formatter
hyperswitch-bot[bot] 3190345
docs(openapi): re-generate OpenAPI specification
hyperswitch-bot[bot] 1ce254c
migrations for fraud_check and payment status
srujanchikke 5405235
Merge branch 'frm_core_flows' of github.com:juspay/hyperswitch into f…
srujanchikke 5f9633c
minor change on down.sql
srujanchikke 296cee1
fix cargo hack by adding frm feature flag
srujanchikke f12d080
chore: run formatter
hyperswitch-bot[bot] e72b38b
add transaction flow after checkout flow for pre frm
srujanchikke c6f46ce
Merge branch 'frm_core_flows' of github.com:juspay/hyperswitch into f…
srujanchikke 3203ffc
Merge branch 'main' of github.com:juspay/hyperswitch into frm_core_flows
srujanchikke e9fd863
resolve comments
srujanchikke cd68352
minor changes
srujanchikke 4b290c6
minor refactor
srujanchikke ff304d6
rename frm_capture_method to payment_capture_method in frm data
srujanchikke 5605ff3
resolve comments and revert frm_requires_merchant_action enum
srujanchikke 8aebbbd
docs(openapi): re-generate OpenAPI specification
hyperswitch-bot[bot] 91320db
Merge branch 'main' into frm_core_flows
srujanchikke 8cc5265
Merge branch 'main' into frm_core_flows
srujanchikke File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
we can use
RequiresMerchantAction
, this is meant to indicate that there is some MerhantAction that is required based on the frm message or some additional fieldsThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
cc: @AnandKGanesh @bernard-eugine
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Narayanbhat166 , We have introduced this status to not interfere with payments which doesn't go through FRM. In future there might decisions/actions we might take based on
FrmRequiredMerchantAction
status for FRM webhooks which doesn't apply for payment connectors.cc: @kashif-m @AnandKGanesh
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right, this status is introduced for explicitly specifying the fact that merchant needs to take an FRM related action on the payment. Using existing variant
RequiresMerchantAction
does not give enough context about what exactly merchant needs to do. This variant is being used in one of the flows for some crypto connector cc: @srujanchikkeHaving a separate variant in this case gives us full context about the type of actions that can be taken by the merchant (payment approval / cancellation in this case)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
cc : @jarnura
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should not introduce the same status
RequiresMerchantAction
with some prefix again because the merchant wants to do something different by this. IfRequiresMerchantAction
is the status, then always the merchant should go to some details field or reason field, which tells what is issue and what merchant needs do.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's also add the feasibility to be able to list only the fraudulent transactions in payments list / filter APIs using the details / reason field
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sure, will do that it in subsequent PR