feat: add metafields as fact on get eligibleitems function

[vanpho93]

Signed-off-by: vanpho93 vanpho02@gmail.com
Resolves #6640
Impact: major
Type: feature

Usage

Example metafields on the cart item:

...
"metafields" : [
    {
        "key" : "name",
        "value" : "Test name",
        "description": "Test"
    }
]
...

Define the inclusion/exclusion rules:

...
"inclusionRules" : {
    "conditions" : {
        "all" : [
            {
                "fact" : "keyValueArray",
                "operator" : "equal",
                "params": {
                    "fieldName": "metafields" => the metafields field in the cart item
                    "inputField": "key",
                    "inputValue": "value",
                    "outputField": "value"
                 },
                "value" : "Test name"
            }
        ]
    }
}
....

[changeset-bot]

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: eeb16fa

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

[brent-hoover]

I see a few problems with this. Firstly that the fact is called "keyValueArray". Does this just assume it's the cart? What if it's the customer? Secondly what if there is a second key-value-array on the product (as there is for some customers who have extended the product)?

Thirdly, will this work for Kinetic @vannguyenn? There are extra values required to access these values.

What advantage does this approach afford over just flattening out the metafields on the cart items?

[vanpho93]

@zenweasel

Firstly that the fact is called "keyValueArray". Does this just assume it's the cart?

This only for checking item inclusion / exclusion, so this fact only applies to cart items.

Secondly what if there is a second key-value-array on the product (as there is for some customers who have extended the product)?

=> They just need to change "fieldName": "metafields" to their fields.

What advantage does this approach afford over just flattening out the metafields on the cart items?
Flattening still works but it will pollute the schema, can be conflicts between fields too.