Skip to content
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

Add a hook 'actionValidateOrderBefore' called before actionValidateOrder #34431

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jan 25, 2024

Conversation

bibips
Copy link
Contributor

@bibips bibips commented Oct 31, 2023

Questions Answers
Branch? develop
Description? Add a new hook 'actionValidateOrderBefore'. This hook is called before the creation of an order
Type? new feature
Category? FO
BC breaks? no
Deprecations? no
How to test? From a module register the hook and create the function hookActionValidateOrderBefore
UI Tests https://github.com/bibips/ga.tests.ui.pr/actions/runs/6709834106
Fixed issue or discussion? Fixes #34432

When the order tunnel is customized with additional steps, developers need to verify the data entered by the user within the tunnel steps.
It is of course possible to verify this data at each stage of the order tunnel, but it is also preferable to check the integrity of the data just before confirming the order.

For example, in the case of an order tunnel stage where the customer can enter a date in the future, it is necessary to check this date again when the customer confirms the order. This check avoids data inconsistencies when the customer confirms his basket several days after creating it.

@prestonBot
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi, thanks for this contribution!

I found some issues with the Pull Request description:

  • Your pull request does not seem to fix any issue, consider creating one (see note below) and linking it by writing Fixes #1234.

Would you mind having a look at it? This will help us understand how interesting your contribution is, thank you very much!

About linked issues

Please consider opening an issue before submitting a Pull Request:

  • If it's a bug fix, it helps maintainers verify that the bug is effectively due to a defect in the code, and that it hasn't been fixed already.
  • It can help trigger a discussion about the best implementation path before a single line of code is written.
  • It may lead the Core Product team to mark that issue as a priority, further attracting the maintainers' attention.

(Note: this is an automated message, but answering it will reach a real human)

@prestonBot prestonBot added develop Branch Feature Type: New Feature labels Oct 31, 2023
@bibips bibips marked this pull request as ready for review October 31, 2023 17:25
@bibips bibips requested a review from a team as a code owner October 31, 2023 17:25
@M0rgan01 M0rgan01 added this to the 9.0.0 milestone Nov 6, 2023
@ps-jarvis ps-jarvis added the Waiting for QA Status: action required, waiting for test feedback label Nov 6, 2023
@florine2623
Copy link
Contributor

I think this should be QA by dev

@florine2623 florine2623 added the Waiting for dev Status: action required, waiting for tech feedback label Nov 6, 2023
@kpodemski kpodemski closed this Jan 11, 2024
@kpodemski kpodemski reopened this Jan 11, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@matks matks left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@matks matks added QA ✔️ Status: check done, code approved and removed Waiting for QA Status: action required, waiting for test feedback Waiting for dev Status: action required, waiting for tech feedback labels Jan 25, 2024
@matks
Copy link
Contributor

matks commented Jan 25, 2024

Thank you @bibips

@matks matks merged commit 9d85a18 into PrestaShop:develop Jan 25, 2024
40 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
develop Branch Feature Type: New Feature Needs autoupgrade PR QA ✔️ Status: check done, code approved
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

9 participants