-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
This issue was moved to a discussion.
You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →
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
RMA flow #1093
Comments
The screenshots are taken from master, but this is happening in 1.2 as well. |
@Serabe do you want to require RMAs for returns? If you don't then you should update this list to remove the Rails.application.config.to_prepare do
Spree::ReturnItem::EligibilityValidator::Default.permitted_eligibility_validators = [
...
]
end Something important to know: A lot of the returns work was built with automated returns in mind, since that's what Bonobos (who authored most of it) did. E.g. you might provide prepaid return shipping labels inside every box you ship and then you may use a 3rd party warehouse to receive returned items (this was the case for Bonobos). With that in mind, some definitions: (If we can make sense of all this, I'll try to open a PR to add more documentation to Solidus itself) A A A So, a lot of what you're seeing is "expected", though the UX probably needs improvement and it looks like there is some missing functionality for stores that require pre-authorization. For you example: This return was not pre-authorized (no Some thoughts on what's missing:
I'm out of time at the moment but would be happy to hear ideas on fixes for this. Note: "Paves the way for non-return reimbursements" was about something different. |
@jordan-brough thank you for the explanation, now this is all much clearer. For your second point on what's missing: I don't think creating a the RMA after is a good solution, but the user is left in a state where it cannot fix the situation in any way I have found: the item appears as reimbursed, but such reimbursement is rejected and no other reimbursement can be created. Your explanation has been much helpful, thank you for taking the time to write it! |
This would be a great in the wiki or the guides. I'll keep it bookmarked. |
Would it be a solution, for stores that have the validator |
This issue was moved to a discussion.
You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →
We are experiencing some issues with the request authorization => customer returns => reimbursement flow. I am showing these flows starting with the sample data loaded and shipping the order.
The normal flow seems to be:
On the other hand, we can create a new Customer Returns directly as follows (starting point is the same as previous flow):
{:rma_required => "item requires an RMA"}
The new return items that allow the user to do the last flow was introduced in 834a24a. In the commit message "Paves the way for non-return reimbursements." can be read.
The second flow seems a bug to me, but it might be that I am not understanding the way to non-return reimbursements (though I might be mixing two unrelated things here).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: