A Ruby client to the Global Collect API.
Pull request Compare This branch is 48 commits ahead, 7 commits behind topspin:master.
Fetching latest commit…
Cannot retrieve the latest commit at this time.
Failed to load latest commit information.
examples Add Ruby 1.9's magic encoding comment Dec 12, 2011
lib removing duplicated constant Nov 5, 2015
spec fixing date specs Apr 3, 2013
tasks adding coverage support Feb 2, 2012
.gitignore adding coverage support Feb 2, 2012
.rvmrc Use RVM, lock it to 1.9.3 with an automatically created gemset Dec 9, 2011
Gemfile using https for rubygems source Nov 5, 2015
HISTORY Add Offline Bank Transfer as a known Const::PaymentProduct. Nov 2, 2010
README.markdown Fix readme: Example file moved. Dec 14, 2011
global_collect.gemspec updating httparty gem dependency due to http://rubysec.github.com/adv… Apr 3, 2013


GlobalCollect: A Gem

A relatively bare Ruby library that supplies access to the GlobalCollect XML payment API.

I've tried for utility over a particular pattern or paradigm (like MVC, which is I guess, what this most-closely resembles...maybe?) Also, this is hardly a complete client implementation; GC exposes 36 methods in their API, while only a fraction are covered here. However, these are the basics needed to integrate and begin using the Hosted MerchantLink service.

With what's here and a basic web app you should be able to use the Hosted MerchantLink service to go through the basic lifecycle of an order: create, authorize, settle, refund/cancel.

Getting Started

  • Get your GlobalCollect API credentials out, then

    gem install global_collect
  • See examples/test_connection.rb, fill in your merchant id, and authentication scheme and then run the first example, which is a TEST_CONNECTION call to make sure everything is nominally OK.



Requests are the basic unit of communication with the GlobalCollect API. They're mostly the programmatic and XML glue that ties the action and arguments of the call together, generating XML to send to GlobalCollect. They can be found under lib/global_collect/requests/*.rb

Each API call that has been implemented has been implemented as a subclass (directly or indirectly) of GlobalCollect::Requests::Base If an API call accepts multiple "models" in the XML request (PARAMS sub-nodes with nontrivial sub-nodes of their own), it is probably a subclass of GlobalCollect::Requests::Composite and is constructed with Model-Builder pairs like this: GlobalCollect::Requests::DoRefund.new([payment_request_model, GlobalCollect::Builders::DoRefund::Payment]) The models and builders are usually paired in their respective module hierarchies: GlobalCollect::RequestModels::DoRefund::Payment vs. GlobalCollect::Builders::DoRefund::Payment In the case where the arguments to the request constructor are models, the validation for the values in the models is encapsulated in the model itself.

If the call accepts a fixed set of non-nested arguments, it will probably be implemented as a subclass of GlobalCollect::Requests::Simple and be constructed with the values of the arguments without and intermediary model. Validation for these members is defined in the request, in this case.


Builders simply take hash-like objects (usually a RequestModel or just a hash for simpler calls) and construct the sub-nodes of the PARAMS XML node in the request. As mentioned above, Builders are paired with their RequestModels by name, simply replacing 'RequestModels' with 'Builders' in the module path.


As mentioned above, RequestModels are a way of breaking up the multiple conceptual arguments to the API. They are paired to their Builders as mentioned above. They're really just a nice way to get a little sanity into this piece when the XML structures that are used as arguments to the API get a bit hairy. (In the sense that they form a kind of inheritance tree, depending on the payment type, or that they have multiple, large arguments, etc...) However, there has been a conscious effort to eschew this complexity when dealing with API calls that really don't have much relative conceptual complexity. (GetOrderStatus really only has one string as an argument, ORDERID, even though it is nested in an ORDER node.)


The raw responses from the API are divided into five groups:

  • Basic
    • No content besides META, RESULT, or ERROR
  • Success Row (Single)
    • Basic + ROW node which contains a roughly fixed set of keys independent of input as well as an extra set of keys that vary based on input.
    • For instance, CONVERT_AMOUNT returns a fixed set of keys.
    • But, INSERT_ORDERWITHPAYMENT returns extra keys depending on payment type.
  • Success Row (Multiple)
    • Basic + multiple ROW nodes, each containing a basic set of fixed keys
    • Currently, only GET_ORDER_STATUS (v1.0) has been verified to return one OR multiple rows if multiple efforts (for recurring payments) or multiple attempts on efforts have been made. (This was learned not from the API docs, but from a GC rep.)
  • Complex
    • Basic + multiple subnodes of RESULT that do not follow the ROW/keys format.
    • For instance, GET_ORDERSTATUS (v2.0) could return multiple STATUS nodes.

The strategy for handling them is as follows:

The base response, GlobalCollect::Responses::Base, is augmented by mix-in modules suggested by the suggested_response_mixins method of the request. These mix-ins allow pretty, method-style access to the members.

GlobalCollect::Requests::Simple requests define the suggested_response_mixins directly in the implementation, whereas GlobalCollect::Requests::Composite delegate to their contained RequestModels. This follows the GC API's pattern of defining the response's nodes based on the type of payment product selected, version used, service used, etc for certain requests.

For responses that follow the singular "Success Row"-style, GlobalCollect::Responses::SuccessRow is included first and then augmented with extra modules if necessary.

For the other responses, there's no particular structure to the implementations.

However, if basic hash-style access to the Crack-parsed response is desired, you can easily do so like this: response = client.make_request(some_request) response.response_hash["XML"]["REQUEST"]["RESPONSE"]["META"]["REQUESTID"] == response.request_id # => true


The GlobalCollect programmer's guide (see below for specific documentation notes) has specified the data formatting expected in requests, and as such, they appear in this gem in roughly the same data format as they appear there: FIELDNAME => [REQUIRED?, FORMAT_STRING] However, in the cases where a field is required only when using a specific service or product, I have relaxed the requirements for the base model. For instance, see the difference between: GlobalCollect::RequestModels::InsertOrderWithPayment::CreditCardOnlinePayment vs GlobalCollect::RequestModels::InsertOrderWithPayment::HostedCreditCardOnlinePayment

In the Hosted version, the field definitions for CARDNUMBER and EXPIRYDATE have been changed from "R" (required) to "O" (optional), even though the programmer's guide has them marked as "R" with a superscript indicating they are not required in the particular case of HostedMerchantLink payments.


On testing:

Complete test coverage has not been a priority, given the simplistic nature of some of the components. For instance, the modules under GlobalCollect::Responses are for the most part the same mechanics (convert a string to an accessor) wrapped around slightly different metadata (lists of method names). I've omitted complete coverage of these methods, in favor of testing the mechanics here and there. Anything that does more than define trivial accessors, in those modules has been tested. A similar approach has been adopted everywhere else; test the moving parts everywhere, test the metadata-transformation stuff once.

I have also provided some sanitized, canned XML responses (in spec/support/*_response.xml) that have either been garnered from the Programmer's Guide PDF or from the wire logs produced during the integration testing period.

On documentation:

All documentation references (like '§ WDL 5.26.1') in the source code refer to the "GlobalCollect WDL Programmers Guide -- 17 November 2009" document (section 5.26.1, in our previous parenthetical), which you'll have to get from GlobalCollect.

On GC API naming conventions:

They have a curious and inconsistent underscoring convention that I'm not fond of. (API actions INSERT_ORDERWITHPAYMENT vs. DO_POSTAL_REMINDER, fields like ORDERID and CURRENCYCODE) As a result, I've added underscores between words that lacked it when defining reader methods and when naming classes and modules (InsertOrderWithPayment, GetOrderStatus, #order_id, #currency_code). However, to avoid confusion in what you're sending to GC, I have left the hash keys for models and requests the same as the names of the XML nodes whose content they represent. I may change this in the future to add the prettier hash keys as an option (strings => raw names, underscored symbols => pretty names).

On GC API versions:

There are currently two API versions: 1.0 and 2.0. However, not all requests are implemented on GC's end in version 2.0. Notably, GET_ORDERSTATUS has a 2.0 call.

On wire logging:

If you specify GlobalCollect.wire_log_file = "mylog.log" the raw XML of all requests and responses will be logged to that file unsanitized. Be sure to keep these secure if you choose that option as they could contain addresses, emails, credit card numbers, etc. If no file is specified, logging will be done to STDOUT.

To assign your own logger to the gem, simply do: your_logger = Rails.logger GlobalCollect.wire_logger = your_logger client = GlobalCollect::ApiClient.new ...


Pull requests and issues (both on GitHub) are greatly appreciated. For patches, please include tests. Thanks!