Summary: Renames the method in PHUIObjectBoxView to match the new PHUIInfoView class.
Test Plan: grepped codebase. Went to Calendar and tried a new status.
Reviewers: btrahan, epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12005
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: Also exclude non-merchant cards.
Test Plan: Loaded subscription, saw better options in dropdown.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11943
Summary:
Fixes T7424. Ref T6308.
Currently, there's no option to just add a card directly from the autopay UI. Add a button so this works.
Also, chip away at T6308 a bit. This isn't perfect but looks a little less out of place.
Test Plan:
{F327637}
- Added a payment method, then set it as autopay.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6308, T7424
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11935
Summary: This generates not-quite-correctly.
Test Plan: Clicked "Edit Subscription" on a Phortune subscription.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11921
Summary: Since this element isn't strictly about errors, re-label as info view instead.
Test Plan: Grepped for all callsites, tested UIExamples and a few other random pages.
Reviewers: btrahan, epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: hach-que, Korvin, epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11867
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: Clean up the error view styling.
Test Plan:
Tested as many as I could find, built additional tests in UIExamples
{F280452}
{F280453}
Reviewers: btrahan, epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: hach-que, Korvin, epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11605
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: Ref T5752, moves mobile action menus to the object box instead of crumbs.
Test Plan: View action menus at tablet, desktop, and mobile break points. Verify clicking buttons works as expected opening menu.
Reviewers: btrahan, epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5752
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11340
Summary: Ref T6822.
Test Plan: Visual inspection. These methods are only called from within `PhabricatorController` subclasses.
Reviewers: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6822
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11241
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: See <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T906>. This behavior is a bug; we should remove the button if the user can't use the application.
Test Plan:
- With Macro uninstalled, did these things verifying the button vanished:
- Sent a user a message.
- Edited a revision.
- Edited repository basic information.
- Edited an initiative.
- Edited a Harbormaster build step.
- Added task comments.
- Edited profile blurb.
- Edited blog description.
- Commented on Pholio mock.
- Uploaded Pholio image.
- Edited Phortune merchant.
- Edited Phriction document.
- Edited Ponder answer.
- Edited Ponder question.
- Edited Slowvote poll.
- Edited a comment.
- Reinstalled Macro and saw button come back.
- Used button to put silly text on a funny picture.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10900
Summary: Ref T5833. See that task for functional goals and some discussion of design.
Test Plan: See screenshots.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5833
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10713
Summary:
Ref T5702. This is a forward-looking change which provides some very broad API improvements but does not implement them. In particular:
- Controllers no longer require `$request` to construct. This is mostly for T5702, directly, but simplifies things in general. Instead, we call `setRequest()` before using a controller. Only a small number of sites activate controllers, so this is less code overall, and more consistent with most constructors not having any parameters or effects.
- `$request` now offers `getURIData($key, ...)`. This is an alternate way of accessing `$data` which is currently only available on `willProcessRequest(array $data)`. Almost all controllers which implement this method do so in order to read one or two things out of the URI data. Instead, let them just read this data directly when processing the request.
- Introduce `handleRequest(AphrontRequest $request)` and deprecate (very softly) `processRequest()`. The majority of `processRequest()` calls begin `$request = $this->getRequest()`, which is avoided with the more practical signature.
- Provide `getViewer()` on `$request`, and a convenience `getViewer()` on `$controller`. This fixes `$viewer = $request->getUser();` into `$viewer = $request->getViewer();`, and converts the `$request + $viewer` two-liner into a single `$this->getViewer()`.
Test Plan:
- Browsed around in general.
- Hit special controllers (redirect, 404).
- Hit AuditList controller (uses new style).
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5702
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10698
Summary: These were missing. Sorry, need to fix this interface someday.
Test Plan: pay for stuff on mobile
Reviewers: btrahan, epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10708
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. Currently, we show all orders/charges, which won't scale well. Show the 10 most recent and link to full order/charge history.
Test Plan: {F216325}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10685
Summary: Ref T2787. This stuff is now irrelevant and/or has no callsites.
Test Plan: `grep`, poked around
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: chad, btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10684
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. Uses the real icons. Straightens out the add payment flow a tiny bit.
Test Plan: {F214922}
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10654
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. For test charges, Paypal is putting the charge in a "payment review" state. Dealing with this state requires way more infrastructure than other providers: we're supposed to pause delivery, then poll Paypal every 6 hours to see if the review has resolved.
Since I can't seem to generate normal test charges, I can't test Paypal for now. Disable it until we have more infrastructure.
(This diff gets us further along, up to the point where I hit this issue.)
Test Plan: Read documentation, rolled eyes.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10644
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
Summary:
Ref T2787. When a user purchases a product in Phortune, transition the cart through a purchased state and invoke product callbacks so applications can respond to the workflow.
Also shore up some stuff like preventing negative amounts of funding.
Test Plan: Backed an initiative and saw it show up on the initiative after completing the purcahsing workflow.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10635
Summary: Ref T2787. `Product` is currently a fairly heavy object, but as Phortune develops it makes a lot of sense to make it a lighter object and put more product logic in applications. Convert it into a fairly lightweight reference to applications. The idea is that Phortune is mostly providing a cart flow, and applications manage the details of products.
Test Plan: Funded an initiative for $1.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10634
