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

feat: require payment plans to provision spaces #268

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Nov 8, 2023

Conversation

travis
Copy link
Contributor

@travis travis commented Nov 7, 2023

Most of the heavy lifting here is done by upgrading the @web3-storage/upload-api dependency. There is a new "feature flag" in the context that changes whether payment plans are required for provisioning - I'm going to set it to false for now in production and we can flip it once we're ready to turn this on.

I spent a bit of time working toward extending our integration tests to exercise the Stripe webhook handler, but it turned into a big enough project that I decided to defer and recorded what I learned in an issue here:

#267

Most of the heavy lifting here is done by upgrading the `@web3-storage/upload-api` dependency. There is a new "feature flag" in the context that changes whether payment plans are required for provisioning - I'm going to set it to `false` for now in production and we can flip it once we're ready to turn this on.

I spent a bit of time working toward extending our integration tests to exercise the Stripe webhook handler, but it turned into a big enough project that I decided to defer and recorded what I learned in an issue here:

#267
Copy link
Contributor

@vasco-santos vasco-santos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

changes look good to me. We just need to see what is going on in inetgration tests by upgrading the upload-api

@@ -38,3 +38,5 @@ SATNAV_BUCKET_NAME = ''
MAILSLURP_API_KEY = ''
MAILSLURP_TIMEOUT = '120000'

# Feature flags
REQUIRE_PAYMENT_PLAN = 'true'
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

would be good to test this in staging. I am not 100% sure if swapping env var is enough, or we need to re-deploy. So knowing that can help us know what we need to do

Copy link

seed-deploy bot commented Nov 8, 2023

View stack outputs

@@ -295,6 +295,7 @@ export async function executionContextToUcantoTestServerContext (t) {

return {
...serviceContext,
grantAccess: async () => {},
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
grantAccess: async () => {},

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

oh lol we were looking at this at precisely the same time - fixed, thx!

@seed-deploy seed-deploy bot temporarily deployed to pr268 November 8, 2023 19:42 Inactive
@travis travis merged commit 57e00ba into main Nov 8, 2023
3 checks passed
@travis travis deleted the feat/plan-gate-provisioning branch November 8, 2023 20:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants