Top Up Products #12
Top Up Products #12
Conversation
|
What's still left todo: How to integrate this into the front end?
|
| def get_or_create_wallet_membership_type(organizer): | ||
| membership_type = organizer.membership_types.filter(name=membership_type_name_for_organizer(organizer)).first() | ||
|
|
||
| if membership_type is not None: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
.filter(...).exists() is the prettier sytnax
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If I read the docs correctly, that doesn't give me the object (which I want to return, because I use it in lines 49 and 53). But in line 49, I can use exists. I've changed that.
| try: | ||
| gc = GiftCard.objects.select_for_update(of=OF_SELF).get(pk=gcpk) | ||
| except GiftCard.DoesNotExist: | ||
| raise PaymentException(_("This gift card does not support this currency.")) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
exception text is wrong (not your fault)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What should it say?
| payment.info_data['transaction_id'] = trans.pk | ||
| payment.confirm(send_mail=not is_early_special_case, generate_invoice=not is_early_special_case) | ||
| try: | ||
| gc = GiftCard.objects.select_for_update(of=OF_SELF).get(pk=gcpk) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
.get() evaluates the queryset, which activates the lock. if you want to keep it locked, the evaluation needs to happen inside the same transaction as the other operations
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is there a reason to keep the lock? Shouldn't the lock around the write part be enough? Ore are you worried about the gift card changing owners?
pretix_wallet/signals.py
Outdated
|
|
||
| @receiver(order_paid, dispatch_uid="payment_wallet_order_paid") | ||
| def wallet_order_paid(sender, order, **kwargs): | ||
| CustomerWallet.create_if_non_existent(sender.organizer, order.customer) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
all of this should only happen if there is a topup product
| @@ -115,3 +108,11 @@ def create(self, request, *args, **kwargs): | |||
| serializer.is_valid(raise_exception=True) | |||
| self.perform_create(serializer) | |||
| return Response(WalletSerializer(self.wallet).data, status=HTTP_201_CREATED) | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| class WalletRequiredRedirectView(CustomerRequiredMixin, WalletRequiredMixin, View): | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll keep this until we've verified the checkout step actually works. If that's the case, we can remove it.
| 'for the top-up product?') | ||
|
|
||
| def is_completed(self, request, warn=False): | ||
| if self.request.customer.wallet: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IIRC this raises if not existent
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, this should never happen (see get). This I intended this to raise as this ever happening is a bug. Then, some of our central assumptions must be pretty wrong.
By marking a pretix products as "top up", buying them will charge a users wallet by their value. This PR also introduces a wallet membership type, automatically creates and assigns it to wallet users. You can use this to ensure users buying top up products are forced to sign in.
It also introduces a redirect url route using which you can funnel users through the wallet login and them redirect them to an arbitrary target. This is useful for linking users to top-up shops since it ensures the correct data (user, wallet, membership type, membership) are created before the user enters the shop.