[ic] Interchange Vend::Payment and Business::OnlinePayment

interchange-users@icdevgroup.org interchange-users@icdevgroup.org
Tue Sep 17 20:06:01 2002


On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 11:18:50AM -0400, Mike Heins wrote:
> Quoting ivan-interchange-users@420.am (ivan-interchange-users@420.am):
> >
> > What would be necessary to get the official support of Interchange for
> > this project?  I'm completely willing to contibute my development
> > time to making this happen, design the new API for Interchange's
> > needs, and so on.  Please let me know.
> 
> Stability. My main worry in using a master payment class outside of
> Interchange is that it would be installed every time a system was
> updated, and there would be the potential for problems being introduced
> due to version change, particularly with large numbers of
> independently-maintained modules.

How would you like to address this problem?

Would you like the Business::OnlinePayment project to shoot for periodic
stable releases including the base class and also stable, tested gateway
modules, suitable for bundling with Interchange or other applications?

Would you like to ship Business::OnlinePayment and processor
modules as part of Interchange, updating from the CPAN versions as you
see fit?

Would you just like to make sure that myself and the other gateway
module authors won't cause you support headache with sloppy, broken CPAN
uploads?  :)

Something else?

> Also, I like the idea of a result hash that is available so that
> we can carry past payment status runs in our session for diagnosis.
> I would want that added where it is available.

The "result hash" is the fields and values returned by the specific
processor?  I'll make sure it is available.

> I would want to keep the configuration all in Interchange, though,
> with no external config files necessary.

Business::OnlinePayment modules don't use config files - the application
is responsible for keeping configuration information.  You pass the
configuration when you create the object:

  $o = new Business::OnlinePayment( "Gateway",
    gateway_option => 'value',
    another_option => 'black cats',
  );

The way I use Business::OnlinePayment in my application is to allow
users to configure the hash of options.  That way they can make use of
configure their gateway and make use of new gateway modules with no
changes necessary to the application code.

Does that work for you?

> > Again, I'm not asking for any code here, I'm willing to do the necessary
> > patches myself.  What I'm looking for is the "buy-in" that yes, this
> > would be acceptable to the Interchange powers-that-be, and also your
> > requirements for making that happen, i.e.:
> > 
> > - Is some sort of "ownership" of this project by the Interchange folks
> >   necessary?  Host it on your CVS, allow you to make releases of the
> >   gateway modules, etc.?  Let me know.
> 
> No, I don't think so. Obviously if we were bringing in a gateway or
> two from our code, we would have it for that. 

>From your code we'd probably want Signio and iTransact, maybe Skipjack.
CCVS if that's still a viable gateway.  I don't think CyberCash is worth
moving over - I understand it'll be turned off soon.

-- 
_ivan