Summary:
This has been replaced by `PolicyCodex` after D16830. Also:
- Rebuild Celerity map to fix grumpy unit test.
- Fix one issue on the policy exception workflow to accommodate the new code.
Test Plan:
- `arc unit --everything`
- Viewed policy explanations.
- Viewed policy errors.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: hach-que, PHID-OPKG-gm6ozazyms6q6i22gyam
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D16831
Summary:
When Phortune merchant accounts are created via mechanisms other than the web UI (for example, by Phacility unit tests) this validation check may fail.
Transactions are validated even if no transactions of the given type are being applied, to allow the editor to raise errors like "Name is required!".
If there's no TYPE_INVOICEEMAIL transaction, we'll get called with empty `$xactions` and fail on `strlen($new_email)` because the variable is never defined.
As a secondary issue, if contactInfo, invoiceEmail or invoiceFooter are not provided the record will fail to insert (none of these are nullable).
Test Plan: Ran Phacility unit tests, got a clean result for new instance creation.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D16798
Summary: Makes a more complete PDF looking invoice form for printing in Phortune.
Test Plan: Make an invoice, click print view, print.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D16762
Summary: Converts PhortuneMerchant to EditEngine.
Test Plan: Edits existing merchants fine, same issue as Conpherence when making new ones with permissions.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D16750
Summary: Is a logo. For merchants.
Test Plan: Set a new logo, remove it. See on list.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T7607
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D16751
Summary: Part of making this look/feel/be more professional is having decent receipts for billing, including contact information (whatever we want to put in there). I'm not using this anywhere at the moment, but will.
Test Plan: Add Contact Info, see Contact Info. Also, why is Remarkup not rendering with line breaks? Seems to be a OneOff thing... anywho... bears!
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T7607
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14125
Summary: Fixes T11556. This was just missing an `implements ...`, which became necessary at some point even for classes that don't use much of the beahvior (ModularTransactions?).
Test Plan: Created a new test payment provider on a Phortune merchant.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11556
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D16471
Summary:
Ref T10537. For Nuance, I want to introduce new sources (like "GitHub" or "GitHub via Nuance" or something) but this needs to modularize eventually.
Split ContentSource apart so applications can add new content sources.
Test Plan:
This change has huge surface area, so I'll hold it until post-release. I think it's fairly safe (and if it does break anything, the breaks should be fatals, not anything subtle or difficult to fix), there's just no reason not to hold it for a few hours.
- Viewed new module page.
- Grepped for all removed functions/constants.
- Viewed some transactions.
- Hovered over timestamps to get content source details.
- Added a comment via Conduit.
- Added a comment via web.
- Ran `bin/storage upgrade --namespace XXXXX --no-quickstart -f` to re-run all historic migrations.
- Generated some objects with `bin/lipsum`.
- Ran a bulk job on some tasks.
- Ran unit tests.
{F1190182}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10537
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15521
Summary: Use `__CLASS__` instead of hard-coding class names. Depends on D12605.
Test Plan: Eyeball it.
Reviewers: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Subscribers: hach-que, Korvin, epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12806
Summary:
See some earlier discussion in D11593:
> One thing I'm vaguely thinking about is the possibilty that users may be able to invoice one another directly, eventually. For example, we might invoice a contracting client.
> We might need an `isInvoice` flag eventually, but `subscriptionPHID` is a reasonable stand-in for now.
This adds such a flag.
Test Plan:
- Generated an ad-hoc invoice and verified it showed up in the right place.
- Used `bin/phortune invoice` to invoice a subscription and verified it worked correctly.
- Paid an invoice and saw it leave "pending invoices" status.
{F377029}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12480
Summary:
This allows a merchant to send a user an invoice for something arbitrary, like services rendered.
Two major missing parts:
- These don't actually get marked as invoices. I'll fix that in the next diff, but it's not entirely trivial because `subscriptionPHID` is currently overloaded to also mean "is invoice".
- We don't send email automatically. I don't plan to fix that for now, since all our invoicing needs are covered by personal email.
Test Plan:
Merchants have a new "new invoice" option:
{F376999}
This leads to selecting a user and account, and then you can generate the invoice (only one actual "purchase" / line item for the moment). You can add a longer-form remarkup description to contextualize the billable items:
{F377001}
This sends the invoice and takes you to the merchant order overview screen:
{F377002}
For now, you copy/paste that link into a nice personal enterprisey business-to-business email; the recipient sees this:
{F377003}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12478
Summary: We've processed some payments without anything going wrong now, and in the Phacility case we control all the payment amounts and the goods are essentially-virtual and billed-after-delivery anyway, so abuse is fairly difficult/pointless and presumably unlikely.
Test Plan: Paid an invoice and saw it go to completed immediately.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11951
Summary: See discussion in D11945. This finishes the rest of the merchant views to respect/use merchant authority in order to interact with objects.
Test Plan:
- As a merchant: accepted, refunded, updated, browsed orders.
- As a non-merchant: couldn't do any of that stuff for orders I don't own.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11950
Summary:
Currently, PhortuneAccounts have a very open default policy to allow merchants to see and interact with them.
This has the undesirable side effect of leaking their names in too many places, because all users are allowed to load the handles for the accounts. Although this information is not super sensitive, we shouldn't expose it.
I went through about 5 really messy diffs trying to fix this. It's very complicated because there are a lot of objects and many of them are related to PhortuneAccounts, but PhortuneAccounts are not bound to a specific merchant. This lead to a lot of threading viewers and merchants all over the place through the call stack and some really sketchy diffs with OmnipotentUsers that weren't going anywhere good.
This is the cleanest approach I came up with, by far:
- Introduce the concept of an "Authority", which gives a user more powers as a viewer. For now, since we only have one use case, this is pretty open-ended.
- When a viewer is acting as a merchant, grant them authority through the merchant.
- Have Accounts check if the viewer is acting with merchant authority. This lets us easily implement the rule "merchants can see this stuff" without being too broad.
Then update the Subscription view to respect Merchant Authority.
I partially updated the Cart views to respect it. I'll finish this up in a separate diff, but this seemed like a good checkpoint that introduced the concept without too much extra baggage.
This feels pretty good/clean to me, overall, even ignoring the series of horrible messes I made on my way here.
Test Plan:
- Verified I can see everything I need to as a merchant (modulo un-updated Cart UIs).
- Verified I can see nothing when acting as a normal user.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11945
Summary: This is a useful capability in Phacility for disabled/suspended instances.
Test Plan: Used `bin/phortune invoice` to invoice a disabled instance, saw it decline to invoice.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11837
Summary: Ref T7202.
Test Plan: Visited edit subscription page and it worked. Clicked edit link from subscription view page and got to the right place.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7202
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11803
Summary: Ref T6881. If we can't automatically bill an invoice, send the account owners a mail explaining why and asking them to pay it.
Test Plan: {F279596}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6881
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11602
Summary:
Ref T6881.
- Fix dead links.
- Let implementations provide more information.
- Provide more information to implementations.
Test Plan: Links work, invoices show billing periods, fewer "Subscription 6" crumbs, all is well in the world.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6881
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11601
Summary:
Ref T6881.
- Allow users to set a default payment method for a subscription, which we'll try to autobill (not all payment methods are autobillable, so we can't require this in the general case, and a charge might fail anyway).
- If a subscription has an autopay method, try to automatically bill it.
- Otherwise, we'll send them an email like "hey here's a bill, it couldn't autopay for some reasons, go pay it and fix those if you want".
- (That email doesn't exist yet but there's a comment about it.)
- Also some UI cleanup.
Test Plan:
- Used `bin/phortune invoice` to autobill myself some fake test money.
{F279416}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6881
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11596
Summary:
Ref T6881. This is basically just some UX.
Right now, if we invoice you, you can //technically// pay it but since we don't tell you about it and don't show it in the UI you'd have to guess the ID by manipulating the URI. We should probably be at least a little more aggressive about billing.
In the common case when we generate a cart/order, we don't show it to the user or merchant in Phortune until the user takes a payment action (basically, Phortune doesn't recognize the cart until you actually check out with it). In the current use case in Fund (and other reasonable use cases) an un-acted-upon cart hasn't been ordered yet, and is just a place for the application to store state as it hands off the workflow to Phortune.
Even if we had a real "Shop for physical goods" app, I think the same rule would apply -- the application itself would probably track and show your current cart, but it wouldn't make sense to put it into your order history in Phortune until you actually buy it.
Since invoices from subscriptions are essentially identical to not-yet-ordered-carts, that mean they also did not show up in the UI (although I think this is also desirable).
This change carves out a place for them:
- Add an "invoices" section with unpaid invoices.
- The UI shows that you have unpaid invoices.
- Invoices have a slightly different rendering, inclduing an alluring "Pay Now" button.
Some considerations:
- One thing I'm vaguely thinking about is the possibilty that users may be able to invoice one another directly, eventually. For example, we might invoice a contracting client.
- Considering this, I thought about making these carts have a special status like `STATUS_DUE`, which replaces `STATUS_READY`, or a flag like `isInvoice`.
- However, this approach was pretty involved and made the //billing// logic more complicated, so I backed off. The ultimate approach here puts more of the complexity into the display logic, which feels better to me.
- We might need an `isInvoice` flag eventually, but `subscriptionPHID` is a reasonable stand-in for now.
- The OrderTable serving double duty for rendering subscriptions feels a little muddy, but I think splitting it into two highly-redundant classes would be worse.
Test Plan:
{F279348}
{F279349}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6881
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11593
Summary:
Ref T6881. This generates a product, purchase and invoice for users, and there's sort of some UI for them. Stuff it doesn't do yet:
- Try to autobill when we have a CC;
- actually tell the user they should pay it;
- ask the application for anything like "how much should we charge", or tell the application anything like "the user paid".
However, these work:
- You can //technically// pay the invoices.
- You can see the invoices you paid in the past.
Test Plan: Used `bin/phriction invoice` to double-bill myself over and over again. Paid one of the invoices.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6881
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11580
Summary:
Ref T6881.
- Add a subscription detail page.
Minor cosmetics:
- Fix glyph, from "X" (old "X marks the spot" icon) to "diamond" (new gem icon).
- Name the initial account "Default Account" instead of "Personal Account", since this seems more general.
Test Plan:
{F278623}
And I got two full days to test that Jan 30/31 -> Feb 28 billing logic!
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6881
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11576
Summary:
Ref T6881. This still doesn't "work" in any reasonable sense of the word, but gets us a bit further.
I'll build out the Phortune UI a little bit next, then look at implementing the Worker to do actual billing.
Test Plan:
- Allocated an instance and saw a Subscription generate properly.
- Saw subscription show up in the Phortune UI, albeit in a very limited way.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6881
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11575
Summary:
Ref T6881. This roughs in the major objects, support classes, and controllers.
- Show subscriptions on account detail.
- Browse all account subscriptions.
- Link to active subsciptions from merchant detail.
Test Plan: Clicked around in the UI. There's no way to create subscriptions yet, so I basically just kicked the tires on this. I probably missed a few things that I'll clean up in followups.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6881
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11482
Summary: Fixes T6693.
Test Plan:
Made a bunch of comments on a diff with differential, being sure to leave inlines here and there. This reproduced the issue in T6693. With this patch this issue no longer reproduces!
Successfully "showed older changes" in Maniphest too.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6693
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10931
Summary:
Ref T4712. Specifically...
- Differential
- needed getApplicationTransactionViewObject() implemented
- Audit
- needed getApplicationTransactionViewObject() implemented
- Repository
- one object needed PhabricatorApplicationTransactionInterface implemented
- setShouldTerminate(true)
- Ponder
- BONUS BUG FIX - leaving a comment on an answer had a bad redirect URI
- both PonderQuestion and PonderAnswer needed PhabricatorApplicationTransactionInterface implemented
- setShouldTerminate(true) on both "history" controllers
- left a "TODO" on buildAnswers on the question view controller, which is non-standard and should be re-written eventually
- Phortune
- BONUS BUG FIX - fix new user "createNewAccount" code to not fatal
- PhortuneAccount, PhortuneMerchant, and PhortuneCart needed PhabricatorApplicationTransactionInterface implemented
- setShouldTerminate(true) on Account view, merchant view, and cart view controller
- Fund
- Legalpad
- Nuance
- NuanceSource needed PhabricatorApplicationTransactionInterface implemented
- Releeph (this product is kind of a mess...)
- HACKQUEST - had to manually create an arcanist project to even be able to make a "product" and get started...!
- BONUS BUG FIX - make sure to "setName" on product edit
- ReleephProject (should be ReleepProduct...?), ReleephBranch, and ReleepRequest needed PhabricatorApplicationTransactionInterface implemented
- Harbormaster
- HarbormasterBuildable, HarbormasterBuild, HarbormasterBuildPlan, and HarbormasterBuildStep all needed PhabricatorApplicationTransactionInterface implemented
- setShouldTerminate(true) all over the place
Test Plan: foreach application, viewed the timeline(s) and made sure they still rendered
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T4712
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10925
Summary: Ref T2787. When order statuses change, send merchants and users email about it.
Test Plan: Used `bin/mail` to review mail.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10694
Summary: Ref T2787. I mostly just want these in place so I can glue emails to them, but they're also useful on their own.
Test Plan: {F216515}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10688
Summary:
Ref T2787. Make this a little more concrete with explicit membership instead of a general edit policy. In particular, we need to know who to email when orders happen, and can't reasonably do that with an edit policy.
I imagine this might eventually get more nuanced (e.g., users who can only approve orders vs users who can manage the merchant itself) but that's a long ways away.
Test Plan: {F216284}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10681
Summary:
Ref T2787.
- Account members can add and remove other members (major use case is corporate accounts).
- Use a modern edge constant setup.
Test Plan: See screenshots.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10678
Summary: Ref T5835. Show backing amounts in transactions. Account for and show refunds.
Test Plan: {F215869}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5835
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10676
Summary: Ref T2787. Allow merchants to flag orders for review. For now, all orders are flagged for review. Eventually, I could imagine Herald rules for coarse things (e.g., require review of all orders over $1,000, or require review of all orders by users not on a whitelist) and maybe examining fraud data for the providers which support it.
Test Plan: {F215848}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10675
Summary: Ref T2787. Support multiple payment accounts so you can have personal vs company payment accounts.
Test Plan: See screenshots.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10673
Summary:
Ref T2787. Currently, we dump the user back into the application. Instead, give them a confirmation screen and then let them continue.
Also fix a couple of unit tests I adjusted the underlying behavior of somewhat-recently in libphutil.
Test Plan: {F215498}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10672
Summary: Ref T2787. These don't necessarily do a ton yet, but we can get PayPal out of hold, at least.
Test Plan: Updated charges from all providers. Cleared a PayPal hold.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10670
Summary:
Ref T2787. When Paypal comes back to us with funds on hold, dead-end the transaction but handle it properly.
Generally, smooth out the user interaction on weird states.
Implement refudnds/cancels for Paypal.
Test Plan: {F215230}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10667
Summary:
Ref T2787. Currently, we kill a cart and dead-end the workflow on a charge failure.
Instead, fail the charge and reset the cart so the user can try using a valid payment instrument like a normal checkout workflow would.
Some shakiness/smoothing on WePay for the moment; PayPal is still made up since we don't have a "Hold" state yet.
Test Plan: {F215214}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10666
Summary:
Ref T2787. This has some rough edges but basically works.
- Users can cancel orders that are in incomplete states (or in complete states, if the application allows them to -- for example, some future application might allow cancellation of billed-but-not-shipped orders).
- Merchant controllers can partially or fully refund orders from any state after payment.
Test Plan: This is still rough around the edges, but issued Stripe and WePay refunds.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: chad, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10664
Summary:
Ref T2787.
- Allow merchants to disable payment providers.
- Show more useful information about providers on the payments page.
- Make test vs live more clear.
- Show merchant status.
- Add a description to merchants to flesh them out a bit -- the merchant areas of responsibilities seem to be fitting well with accounts, etc.
Test Plan: {F215109}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10662
Summary:
Ref T2787. Builds on D10649 by rebining existing objects (carts, charges, etc) to merchantPHIDs and providerPHIDs instead of an implicit global merchant and weird global artifacts (providerType / providerKey).
Basically:
- When you create something that users can pay for, you specify a merchant to control where the payment goes.
- Accounts are install-wide, but payment methods are bound to merchants. This seems to do a reasonable job of balancing usability and technical concerns.
- Replace a bunch of weird links between objects with standard PHIDs.
- Improve "add payment method" flow.
Test Plan: Went through the Fund flow with Stripe and WePay, funding an initiative.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10652
Summary:
Ref T2787. Instead of making providers global configuration, make them a thing on merchants with web configuration.
Payment methods and some of the pyament workflow needs to be retooled a bit after this, but this seemed like a reasonable cutoff point for this diff.
Test Plan: See screenshots.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10649
Summary:
Ref T2787. Currently, you add payment providers (Stripe, Paypal, etc) in global configuration.
Generally, this approach is cumbersome, limiting, and often hard for users to figure out. It also doesn't provide a natural way to segment payment receivers or provide web access to administrative payment functions like issuing refunds, canceling orders, etc. I think that stuff definitely needs to be in the web UI, and the rule for access to it can't reasonably just be "all administrators" in a lot of reasonable cases.
The only real advantage is that it prevents an attacker from adjusting settings and pointing something at an account they control. But this attack can be mitigated through notifications, some sort of CLI-only merchant lock, payment accounts being relatively identifiable, etc.
So introduce "merchants", which are basically payable entities. An individual merchant will have attached Paypal, Stripe, etc., accounts, and access rules. When you buy something in an application, the merchant to pay is also specified. They also provide an umbrella for dealing with permissions down the line.
This may get a //little// cumbersome because if there are several merchants your saved card information is not shared across them. I think that will be fine in the normal case (most installs will have only one merchant). Even if it isn't and we leave providers global, I think introducing this is the right call from a web UI / permissions point of view. I'll play around with it in the next couple of diffs and figure out exactly where the line goes.
Test Plan: Listed, created, edited, viewed merchants.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10648
Summary:
Ref T2787. These were still stuck in the stone ages.
(The handles are pretty skeletal but most aren't used anywehre.)
Test Plan: Funded an initiative without anything breaking. Grepped for removed constants.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10647
Summary:
Ref T2787. This doesn't get all the edge cases quite correct, but is generally a safe, complete payment workflow:
- Shares the actual charging state logic.
- Makes it appropriately stateful with locking and transactions.
- Gets the main flow correct.
- Detects failure cases, just tends to blow up rather than help the user resolve them.
Test Plan:
- Charged with WePay.
- Charged with Infinite Free Money.
- Resumed an abandoned cart.
- Hit all failure states where we just dead-end the cart. Not ideal, but (seemingly) complete/safe/correct.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10639
Summary: Ref T2787. Similar to D10634, give applications more control over the cart workflow. For now this just means they get to pick exit URIs, but in the future they can manage more details of cart behavior.
Test Plan: Funded an initiative and got returned to the initiative instead of dead-ending in Phortune.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10638
