Skip to content

Conversation

@mstegmeyer
Copy link
Contributor

1. Why is this change necessary?

After JWT refactoring of the payment token, where somehow the AppAsyncPaymentHandlerTest never failed, it does now.

2. What does this change do, exactly?

Needs to be refactored to JWT refactoring.

3. Describe each step to reproduce the issue or behaviour.

4. Please link to the relevant issues (if any).

5. Checklist

  • I have written tests and verified that they fail without my change
  • I have updated developer-facing release notes if this change is relevant for external developers:
    • Add a short entry to RELEASE_INFO-6.<major>.md under “Upcoming” for informational changes, including the consequences of the change and how it affects external developers.
    • Add an UPGRADE section in UPGRADE-6.<next-major>.md for breaking changes (what/why/impact/how to adapt).
    • See the Release Notes & Changelog Process for details.
  • I have written or adjusted the documentation according to my changes
  • This change has comments for package types, values, functions, and non-obvious lines of code
  • I have read the contribution requirements and fulfilled them

@mstegmeyer mstegmeyer requested review from a team and DennisGarding November 19, 2025 14:51
@mstegmeyer mstegmeyer self-assigned this Nov 19, 2025
@mstegmeyer mstegmeyer added the domain/checkout Responsible for fulfilling the buying transaction inside the store and everything related to it label Nov 19, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link

Warnings
⚠️ The Pull Request doesn't contain any release info, if your changes are relevant for external developers please add an entry to the release info file, including the consequences of the change and how it affects external developers.

@explore-openapi
Copy link

📸 OpenAPI Snapshot

Track changes in your API specifications.

Project: shopware/store-api

ℹ️ No changes detected

Your OpenAPI schema is identical to the base branch (trunk). No new snapshot was created.

📖 View Specification
Open in Visual Editor

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 19, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 52.00%. Comparing base (783c58a) to head (0b54ae9).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on trunk.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##            trunk   #13602      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   52.00%   52.00%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        3337     3337              
  Lines       98629    98633       +4     
==========================================
- Hits        51295    51292       -3     
- Misses      47334    47341       +7     
Flag Coverage Δ
phpunit-migration 49.76% <ø> (ø)
phpunit-unit 50.03% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@mstegmeyer mstegmeyer enabled auto-merge November 19, 2025 14:55
@mstegmeyer mstegmeyer added this pull request to the merge queue Nov 19, 2025
*/
public function testPayFinalizeWithUnsignedResponseOldStruct(): void
{
Feature::skipTestIfActive('v6.8.0.0', $this);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

To keep old tests until new releases everywhere else we are using instead
#[DisabledFeatures(['v6.8.0.0'])]

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No, that's the variant for Unit tests, as there, everything is enabled by default and we can disable at runtime. The feature flags of integration tests are not manipulatable this way (e.g. because of container differences with and without FF, therefore the pipeline (should) execute them once with and once without feature flags and we skip where necessary

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ok understood, yet we are doing it for several integration tests to be removed
Screenshot 2025-11-19 at 17 12 13

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

then those do nothing 🙈 afaik the attribute is not even used in integration tests

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I will check with a branch by removing those annotations in those tests, but from

<bootstrap class="Shopware\Core\Test\PHPUnit\Extension\FeatureFlag\FeatureFlagExtension"/>
then
new TestPreparationStartedSubscriber($savedConfig),
and

I see nothing that technically prevents those annotations to be consumed in integration tests.
What did I miss? 🤔

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🤔 maybe I am wrong 🙈 but afaik, they did not work properly, when I tried them 🤔

Merged via the queue into trunk with commit 305aac5 Nov 19, 2025
88 checks passed
@mstegmeyer mstegmeyer deleted the fix/failing-appasyncpaymenthandlertest branch November 19, 2025 15:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

domain/checkout Responsible for fulfilling the buying transaction inside the store and everything related to it

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants