Context:
In ATG Commerce - for going into checkout one need to call moveToPurchaseInfo method of the CartModifierFormHandler which executes the moveToPurchaseInfo pipeline chain and check the order/commerce items and validates them. Then, checkout login page will be displayed if the
user has not logged yet. Otherwise user will be directed to the shipping page.
Requirement:
Even after going to shipping page user should be able to remove/updateQuantity of items in Cart.
Question:
if I want to remove/updateQuanity at this stage, do I just need to call 'RemoveItemFromOrder' Or if I'll have to call "moveToPurchaseInfo" again after any modification in the cart ? Any other alternative to fulfill above requirement ?
Resolving the CartModifierFormhandler you can do something like this
String[] skuIds = { "sku10011"};
CartModifierFormHandler cmfh = (CartModifierFormHandler) ServletUtil .getCurrentRequest().resolveName("/atg/commerce/order/purchase/CartModifierFormHandler");
cmfh.setCatalogRefIds(skuIds);
cmfh.setProductId("prod10010");
cmfh.setQuantity(12);
cmfh.handleAddItemToOrder(ServletUtil.getCurrentRequest(),
ServletUtil.getCurrentResponse());
order = cmfh.getOrder();
DynamoHttpServletRequest request = ServletUtil.getCurrentRequest();
request.setParameter("sku2", "13");
// Set the new quantity for the commerce item being updated.
cmfh.setCheckForChangedQuantity(true);
DynamoHttpServletResponse response = request.getResponse();
cmfh.handleSetOrder(request, response);
List<CommerceItem> commerceItem = order.getCommerceItems();
double quantity = commerceItem.get(0).getQuantity();
assertEquals(13, quantity, 0);
#Vihung for making the correction
There is a Update Order Pipeline Chain in ATG Commerce Checkout.
So, whenever there is a change in an Order, during Checkout or before Checkout, the update order chain is always called.
Now if you see your operations:
Update Order / Remove Item from Order - Both are update operations. So everytime you do this kind of update, calling the Update Order Pipeline Chain should suffice. But, make sure that you re-price the order (repriceOrderChain) before calling the Update Order Chain. If you keep digging in the addItemToOrder method, you will know how the call the two pipeline chains to update the order.
Hence, you don't need to use the moveToPurchaseInfo because your order was already checked on the Checkout specific parameters when you Moved to Checkout for the first time. And now the only change you are doing is update quantity / remove items.
PS: Do reply if you find anything different.
Regards,
Gaurav E
Related
I am trying to reset a form so that it appears to Drupal 8 that it hasn't been submitted. So far I have been unable to do this, as I cannot find any available methods (setSubmitted() hardcodes it to TRUE without a FALSE option). The reason is this isn't a full submit, but a submit of one field after which I would like the user to be redirected to another page that has another form, and I would like this secondary form to use the value obtained in the first step.
In the submit handler for the first part I use this to redirect:
$form_state->setRedirect('my.route', [], []);
And this works, but when the form reaches the second form (it seems) that the second form thinks it is a submission. As a result any submit buttons I add to the second form seem to make it auto-submit, and this breaks my user journey.
In the submit for the first part I have tried:
$form_state->setRebuild(TRUE);
$form_state = new FormState();
unset($form_state);
Tried the above in various configurations to no avail. They all prevent/ignore the setRedirect call that I make afterwards. The reason I want/need to do it this way is I want to preserve the POST method used.
Do you want to obtain something similar to what core search module does? It has simple SearchBlockForm that sends data to more complex SearchPageForm.
SearchBlockForm uses GET method (though you may use POST):
$form['#method'] = 'get';
and has no id and token fields:
function search_form_search_block_form_alter(&$form, FormStateInterface $form_state) {
$form['form_build_id']['#access'] = FALSE;
$form['form_token']['#access'] = FALSE;
$form['form_id']['#access'] = FALSE;
}
BTW, the last change allows you to avoid running submit callbacks.
Hope this helps.
I have a content type (batch) that is tied to multiple instances of a different content (my_item) by an id. The my_item content type has a workflow consisting of draft, pending, and approved. There is a form that creates the batch and "approves" the my_item content type instances, and sets the my_item_instances' batch_id to the batch's batch id (set when the batch is created). The approved state is a final state, where it cannot be edited nor retracted.
I need to be able to change the state of the my_item content type instances back to draft. Since there is no transition for back to draft from the approved state when the item is being deleted (through a subscriber), I need to somehow set the state of the my_items back to "draft" without needing a transition.
There are two methods I tried:
The subscriber is IObjectWillBeRemoved
def my_item_will_be_removed(obj,event)
my_items = catalog.searchResults('batch_id':obj.batch_id)
for i in my_items:
api.content.transition(obj=i,to_state='pending')
This results in an error
InvalidParaemterError: Could not find workflow to set state to draft on
I also tried using:
wf_tool = api.portal.get_tool(name='portal_workflow')
wf_tool.setStatusOf('item_workflow',i,'pending')
For some reason that ends up with the my_item becoming a string.
Is it not possible? If it is possible, how can I do so?
Offtopic, but I guess a workaround I could use for now is:
make a transition "retract_from_approval" that goes from the approved state to the draft state
'can_retract_from_approval' needs to be assigned to the role that can delete the "batch"
In the deletion event, iterate through the my_items, assign the 'can_retract_from_approval' permission to the role responsible for deleting the batch locally on the current iteration
my_items = catalog.searchResults('batch_id',obj.batch_id)
for m in my_items:
mi_obj = m.getObject()
mi_obj.manage_permission('retract_from_approval',['ARole'],obj=mi_obj)
Then use the workflow tool to do the 'retract_from_approval' transition that sends the my_item back into the draft state. And then remove the 'can_retract_from_approval' permission.
This is a snippet of an old migration tool I used for migrate from Plone 2.5 to Plone 3 a lot of years ago.
wtool = getToolByName(obj, 'portal_workflow')
status = {'action': '',
'review_state': old_state,
'actor': 'admin',
'comments': 'Recovery state',
'time': DateTime() }
wtool.setStatusOf(workflow_id, obj, status)
not sure if it still works nowadays
you probably need a reindexObjectSecurity
TL;DR version:
In CQ workflows, is there a difference between what's available to the OR Split compared to the Process Step?
Is it possible to access the /history/ nodes of a workflow instance from within an OR Split?
How?!
The whole story:
I'm working on a workflow in CQ5 / AEM5.6.
In this workflow I have a custom dialog, which stores a couple of properties on the workflow instance.
The path to the property I'm having trouble with is: /workflow/instances/[this instance]/history/[workItem id]/workItem/metaData and I've called the property "reject-or-approve".
The dialog sets the property fine (via a dropdown that lets you set it to "reject" or "approve"), and I can access other properties on this node via a process step (in ecma script) using:
var actionReason;
var history = workflowSession.getHistory(workItem.getWorkflow());
// loop backwards through workItems
// and as soon as we find a Action Reason that is not empty
// store that as 'actionReason' and break.
for (var index = history.size() - 1; index >= 0; index--) {
var previous = history.get(index);
var tempActionReason = previous.getWorkItem().getMetaDataMap().get('action-message');
if ((tempActionReason != '')&&(tempActionReason != null)) {
actionReason = tempActionReason;
break;
}
}
The process step is not the problem though. Where I'm having trouble is when I try to do the same thing from inside an OR Split.
When I try the same workflowSession.getHistory(workItem.getWorkflow()) in an OR Split, it throws an error saying workItem is not defined.
I've tried storing this property on the payload instead (i.e. storing it under the page's jcr:content), and in that case the property does seem to be available to the OR Split, but my problems with that are:
This reject-or-approve property is only relevant to the current workflow instance, so storing it on the page's jcr:content doesn't really make sense. jcr:content properties will persist after the workflow is closed, and will be accessible to future workflow instances. I could work around this (i.e. don't let workflows do anything based on the property unless I'm sure this instance has written to the property already), but this doesn't feel right and is probably error-prone.
For some reason, when running through the custom dialog in my workflow, only the Admin user group seems to be able to write to the jcr:content property. When I use the dialog as any other user group (which I need to do for this workflow design), the dialog looks as though it's working, but never actually writes to the jcr:content property.
So for a couple of different reasons I'd rather keep this property local to the workflow instance instead of storing it on the page's jcr:content -- however, if anyone can think of a reason why my dialog isn't setting the property on the jcr:content when I use any group other than admin, that would give me a workaround even if it's not exactly the solution I'm looking for.
Thanks in advance if anyone can help! I know this is kind of obscure, but I've been stuck on it for ages.
a couple of days ago i ran into the same issue. The issue here is that you don't have the workItem object, because you don't really have an existing workItem. Imagine the following: you are going through the workflow, you got a couple of workItems, with means, either process step, either inbox item. When you are in an or split, you don't have existing workItems, you can ensure by visiting the /workItems node of the workflow instance. Your workaround seems to be the only way to go through this "issue".
I've solved it. It's not all that elegant looking, but it seems to be a pretty solid solution.
Here's some background:
Dialogs seem to reliably let you store properties either on:
the payload's jcr:content node (which wasn't practical for me, because the payload is locked during the workflow, and doesn't let non-admins write to its jcr:content)
the workItem/metaData for the current workflow step
However, Split steps don't have access to workItem. I found a fairly un-helpful confirmation of that here: http://blogs.adobe.com/dmcmahon/2013/03/26/cq5-failure-running-script-etcworkflowscriptscaworkitem-ecma-referenceerror-workitem-is-not-defined/
So basically the issue was, the Dialog step could store the property, but the OR Split couldn't access it.
My workaround was to add a Process step straight after the Dialog in my workflow. Process steps do have access to workItem, so they can read the property set by the Dialog. I never particularly wanted to store this data on the payload's jcr:content, so I looked for another location. It turns out the workflow metaData (at the top level of the workflow instance node, rather than workItem/metaData, which is inside the /history sub-node) is accessible to both the Process step and the OR Split. So, my Process step now reads the workItem's approveReject property (set by the Dialog), and then writes it to the workflow's metaData node. Then, the OR Split reads the property from its new location, and does its magic.
The way you access the workflow metaData from the Process step and the OR Split is not consistent, but you can get there from both.
Here's some code: (complete with comments. You're welcome)
In the dialog where you choose to approve or reject, the name of the field is set to rejectApprove. There's no ./ or anything before it. This tells it to store the property on the workItem/metaData node for the current workflow step under /history/.
Straight after the dialog, a Process step runs this:
var rejectApprove;
var history = workflowSession.getHistory(workItem.getWorkflow());
// loop backwards through workItems
// and as soon as we find a rejectApprove that is not empty
// store that as 'rejectApprove' and break.
for (var index = history.size() - 1; index >= 0; index--) {
var previous = history.get(index);
var tempRejectApprove = previous.getWorkItem().getMetaDataMap().get('rejectApprove');
if ((tempRejectApprove != '')&&(tempRejectApprove != null)) {
rejectApprove = tempRejectApprove;
break;
}
}
// steps up from the workflow step into the workflow metaData,
// and stores the rejectApprove property there
// (where it can be accessed by an OR Split)
workItem.getWorkflowData().getMetaData().put('rejectApprove', rejectApprove);
Then after the Process step, the OR Split has the following in its tabs:
function check() {
var match = 'approve';
if (workflowData.getMetaData().get('rejectApprove') == match) {
return true;
} else {
return false;
}
}
Note: use this for the tab for the "approve" path, then copy it and replace var match = 'approve' with var match = 'reject'
So the key here is that from a Process step:
workItem.getWorkflowData().getMetaData().put('rejectApprove', rejectApprove);
writes to the same property that:
workflowData.getMetaData().get('rejectApprove') reads from when you execute it in an OR Split.
To suit our business requirements, there's more to the workflow I've implemented than just this, but the method above seems to be a pretty reliable way to get values that are entered in a dialog, and access them from within an OR Split.
It seems pretty silly that the OR Split can't access the workItem directly, and I'd be interested to know if there's a less roundabout way of doing this, but for now this has solved my problem.
I really hope someone else has this same problem, and finds this useful, because it took me waaay to long to figure out, to only apply it once!
I am using Tastypie, Django for my project.
To Update a many to many field I have used save_m2m hook.
def save_m2m(self, bundle):
for field_name, field_object in self.fields.items():
if not getattr(field_object, 'is_m2m', False):
continue
if not field_object.attribute:
continue
if field_object.readonly:
continue
related_mngr = getattr(bundle.obj, field_object.attribute)
related_objs = []
print bundle.data[field_name]
for related_bundle in bundle.data[field_name]:
try:
stock = Stock.objects.get(nse_symbol = related_bundle.obj.nse_symbol)
print stock.__dict__
except Stock.DoesNotExist as e:
dataa = {"error_message": e}
raise ImmediateHttpResponse(response=HttpBadRequest(content=json.dumps(dataa), content_type="application/json; charset=UTF-8"))
related_objs.append(stock)
related_mngr.add(*related_objs)
Now I want to remove elements from the same many to many field.
How should I achieve this. Do I have to send a patch request or delete request and how to handle this.
I am begineer in tastypie. I googled it some time and I couldn't find a proper way. Please guide me how to complete this.
Thanks.
I've thought a lot about handing m2m relationships, since most of our app depends on m2m links.
I've settled for the approach of an update method. Pass in the all the references of the relationships you want changed (add and remove), then update the db accordingly. We only pass in the changed values, since if you have a paginated list, you only want to update the items the user has identified. Generally I use a custom hook for this defined in override_urls.
I used to have a separate add and remove method, which worked well until we changed the gui and allowed users simply to change checkboxes. In that approach having an update method was much more useful. You'll have to decide on which method suits your application the best.
I need to send an email on completion of a build in TFS 2010 which details the work items associated with check-ins that have been compiled as part of this build. This works no problem via use of the associatedChangesets variable available in the build workflow.
However, in a production situation, we will merge changes from our Development branch into a Release branch. At this point, the build considers there to have only been one change - which is the aforementioned merging of Development into Release. Obviously this is fairly useless as we need to find out which changes where made in the branch that was merged in, and the work items associated.
Does anyone know how to accomplish this using the TFS 2010 API? It seems to be fairly poorly documented from an API perspective. I know you can expand the merge history node in VS2010 but obviously this is no good as this data needs to be collected programatically so a report email can be sent.
OK... I think I found a solution to this although it's clunky and truth be told I'm not exactly sure how it works. But here goes - maybe it will point someone in the right direction.
var associatedWorkItems = new List<WorkItem>();
//Passed in from the build workflow (this variable is available under the 'Run On Agent' sequence as 'associatedChangesets'
IList<Changeset> associatedChangesets = context.GetValue(BuildAssociatedChangesets);
if (associatedChangesets.Count > 0)
{
var projectCollection =
new TfsTeamProjectCollection(new Uri("http://localhost:8080/tfs/DefaultCollection"));
VersionControlServer versionControlServer = projectCollection.GetService<VersionControlServer>();
foreach (var changeset in associatedChangesets)
{
//In order to view the individual changes, load the changeset directly from the VCS.
Changeset localChangeset = versionControlServer.GetChangeset(changeset.ChangesetId);
foreach (Change change in localChangeset.Changes)
{
//Find out what was merged in.
ChangesetMerge[] mergedChangesets = versionControlServer.QueryMerges(
null,
null,
change.Item.ServerItem,
new ChangesetVersionSpec(localChangeset.ChangesetId),
new ChangesetVersionSpec(localChangeset.ChangesetId),
null,
RecursionType.Full);
//Extract work item information from changesets being identified as merged.
foreach (var changesetMerge in mergedChangesets)
{
Changeset actualChange = versionControlServer.GetChangeset(changesetMerge.SourceVersion);
foreach (WorkItem item in actualChange.WorkItems)
{
if (!associatedWorkItems.Exists(w => w.Id == item.Id))
{
associatedWorkItems.Add(item);
}
}
}
}
}
}
Don't ask me exactly how QueryMerges works but all I'm doing here it saying show me what what merged as a part of a changeset checked in. You'll notice that the parameters ChangesetVersionSpec are the same - this means we're just looking at merges from this one changeset.
You'll get back an array of ChangesetMerge objects from QueryMerges(). In the ChangesetMerge class there is a property called SourceVersion - this is the ChangesetId of the original changeset merged in. Once we've got that we can use the VersionControlServer.GetChangeset() method to load the individual set and extract the WorkItem. This is then added to a list of WorkItems which can be manipulated in any way you want (in my case an email). I also used the .Exists() check to make sure the same WorkItem doesn't get recorded twice.
Note that even though you have the collection associatedChangesets from the build workflow, for some reason (for me at least), the Changes[] property inside associatedChangesets was never populated (hence loading each individual changeset using the VersionControlServer.GetChangeset() method as this seems to actually populate all the fields we need.
Like I say, 1. this is a clunky solution (lots of looping - some of which is probably unecessary), 2. I don't fully understand how this works although it seems to produce the required results - I came to this conclusion by doing a lot testing and debugging) and finally - it's the best I could come up with based on the woeful documentation provided by Microsoft.
Hope it helps someone!