Stripe PI: Add AFT fields #5418
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
yunnydang
force-pushed
the
add_aft_fields_stripe_pi
branch
from
946d131 to
9a4141a
Compare
jcreiff
reviewed
Mar 3, 2025
| last4: '1234' | ||
| }, | ||
| bank: { | ||
| account_number: '1234567890' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @yunnydang it occurs to me that if this is an option that customers might be sending to stripe, it's something we would need to scrub from the transcript (and also other places in the transaction 😓 ). I'm going to check with the AM about whether or not this is a need; if not, we may want to rethink leaving this wide open and instead be more prescriptive about how we map the fields 😞
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This change adds the optional AFT fields, specifically the sender and recipient fields.
Local:
6205 tests, 81261 assertions, 0 failures, 0 errors, 0 pendings, 0 omissions, 0 notifications
100% passed
Unit:
70 tests, 388 assertions, 0 failures, 0 errors, 0 pendings, 0 omissions, 0 notifications
100% passed
Remote:
102 tests, 453 assertions, 3 failures, 0 errors, 0 pendings, 0 omissions, 0 notifications
97.0588% passed
Note: I have this implemented to bail out of the helper method if none of the 4 conditions are met. Im thinking that this would make sense but can of course listen to others suggestions. Also im not entirely sure how much of a difference it makes for capture_method to be manual, but its only set that way on authorize calls but i tested a purchase call with this and it returns a successful transaction as well.