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

PayFlow - Default WC Order Status Option #965

Closed
angelleye opened this issue Dec 17, 2017 · 1 comment
Closed

PayFlow - Default WC Order Status Option #965

angelleye opened this issue Dec 17, 2017 · 1 comment
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@angelleye
Copy link
Collaborator

The default WC order status for completed orders is Processing. We often get requests where people want this to be changed to Completed. For most gateways this can be done using IPN and our guide to automatically update the status accordingly.

PayFlow does not trigger IPNs, though. It has a similar feature called Silent POST, however, this is designed for PayFlow Hosted and does not get triggered with PayFlow Pro transactions. As such, we really have no way to do this as a post-transaction processing option.

I'd like to add an option in the PayFlow settings where the user can specify what order status they would like to use for completed PayFlow transactions. This option would only show up when the Action is set to Sale because Authorization orders are already handled in different ways.

So, when the Action is set to Sale I'd like to provide the following option under that in settings:

Default Order Status
Options:  Processing, Completed
Description:  Set the default order status for completed PayFlow credit card transactions.
Default:  Processing (which is the same as WC)
@angelleye
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@kcppdevelopers I see this update has been merged into dev, and I see the option added in the code when I view it locally, but I'm running on the dev branch at woo.angelleye.com and this option is not showing up there in settings for some reason..??

angelleye pushed a commit that referenced this issue Dec 21, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant