o2m: `region` does not sync

[francescosalvi]

Hello
while doing some tests with v1.9 I noticed that o2m.js only uses the field region as an alternative for performing the m2-directory lookup (in case regionCode is missing), but does not forward the field alongside the other ones.

This leads to the scenario where, if no matching directory data is present in m2 db, the "free-text" region information is simply lost (will always end up with regionId: 0, regionCode: '' - here)

From my tests (with m2.3.2), if passing all of regionId, regionCode, and region, if the Id and Code are populated they will still take precedence, with region only acting as a fallback; because of this I think a simple patch like the following could do:

diff --git a/src/platform/magento2/o2m.js b/src/platform/magento2/o2m.js
index 81cfc06..d09157a 100644
--- a/src/platform/magento2/o2m.js
+++ b/src/platform/magento2/o2m.js
@@ -176,6 +176,7 @@ function processSingleOrder(orderData, config, job, done, logger = console) {
                 "email": billingAddr.email,
                 "regionId":  mappedBillingRegion.regionId,
                 "regionCode": mappedBillingRegion.regionCode,
+                "region": billingAddr.region,
                 "company": billingAddr.company,
                 "vatId": billingAddr.vat_id
               },
@@ -197,6 +198,7 @@ function processSingleOrder(orderData, config, job, done, logger = console) {
               "email": shippingAddr.email,
               "regionId": mappedShippingRegion.regionId,
               "regionCode": mappedShippingRegion.regionCode,
+              "region": shippingAddr.region,
               "company": shippingAddr.company
             }
           } else {

[pkarw]

Thanks! can you propose a PR if this is a general prupose fix please?

[francescosalvi]

Hi @pkarw , I opened the PR

if this is a general prupose fix

from my tests, it should be general-purpose; I also checked the code responsible for the "fallback" logic (\Magento\Customer\Model\Address\AbstractAddress::getRegion*) for changes between 2.2.x and 2.3.x and didn't find any, so I assume this works fine with 2.2 as well..

[pkarw]

OK cool, can you please prepare a Pull Request from your fork @francescosalvi?

[francescosalvi]

@pkarw I think #319 is ready to be merged?