dev/core#219 Improve consistency displaying "Test Transactions" #12385
Conversation
|
(Standard links)
|
|
@davejenx This has caught you out too in the past I think? |
| @@ -68,6 +68,11 @@ | |||
| </div> | |||
| </div> | |||
| <table class="crm-info-panel"> | |||
| {if $is_test} | |||
| <div class="help"> | |||
| <strong>{ts}This transaction was submitted using a TEST payment processor{/ts}</strong> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is not always true that every test transaction is submitted using Test payment processor, it can be pay later as well.
|
|
||
| {if $is_test} | ||
| <div class="help"> | ||
| <strong>{ts}This transaction was submitted using a TEST payment processor{/ts}</strong> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is not always true that every test transaction is submitted using Test payment processor, it can be pay later as well.
|
@mattwire I did a round of QA on current state. Test Case 1: Add test contribution through Online form. Test Case 2. Add Membership + contribution through online form. Test Case 3: Register Participant through online form. Test Case 4. Add pledge through online form. Test Case 5. Add pay later contribution through online form. Test Case 6. Add pay later Membership + contribution through online form. Test Case 7. Add contribution recur through online form. Also the tab count for contribution v/s inner contribution tab differs and also for other entities( Agree to not include count for test contribution/membership etc). Is it feasible to have separate tab for test contribution?
|
|
I agree in principle with showing these - but keen to hear more input into principle and also into specific UI implementation. @pradpnayak has done a nice review above @agh1 @MegaphoneJon @Stoob @lcdservices @jusfreeman ping for any thoughts |
|
I also agree in principle with the change, and have been caught (or had clients caught) looking for test memberships. I didn't test the PR yet but will try to carve out some time to do that. |
|
Thanks @eileenmcnaughton and @mattwire for your efforts to make CiviCRM easier to understand for end users. I'd like to suggest that rather than have the message say "This transaction was submitted using a TEST payment processor" that it be simplified to be just "This is a TEST transaction. No actual payment received". Using the words "TEST payment processor" assumes knowledge of what a payment processor is and many of our users are not familiar with that term, but are likely to see this message and be confused. As @pradpnayak pointed out: "It is not always true that every test transaction is submitted using Test payment processor, it can be pay later as well." |
|
I agree with the UI change, and want to thank @mattwire and @pradpnayak in particular for their recent efforts toward ironing out some of the rough edges of Civi recently - though it seems like active participation in fixing up Civi is way up all around lately, which is great. |
@jusfreeman @lcdservices @pradpnayak For the wording, how about simply: |
|
@mattwire I see 2 thumbs up on your latest wording suggestion which suggests to me it is accepted -if you change it & @pradpnayak confirms I will merge |
…text to show if a contribution/recur/membership is a test when viewing details
mattwire
force-pushed
the
test_transactions
branch
from
b8f0f05
to
abe1161
Compare
|
@pradpnayak I've updated the wording - could you confirm this is ok to merge now? |
|
@mattwire I did QA on current state of code. The change looks good now Test Case: Add test contribution through Online form. Test Case: Add test contribution + Membership through Online form.
However the tab count is not matching do we need to fix that or leave as it is? Note: Test participant and pledge are not displayed under respective tabs but their contribution does appear. |
|
@mattwire @pradpnayak I think we should fix the tab count |
|
@MiyaNoctem Any idea how that secondary tab count is being calculated? It seems to be different from the main tab and is including test transactions (ref #11956) |
|
@mattwire do you github permissions allow you to assign & unassign tasks? I'm having trouble parsing the PRs in the queue to find the ones that make sense to put effort into. Perhaps if I could assign this to you & you can assign back to @pradpnayak for final sign off that would help as a workflow? But i'm not sure what part you can do |
|
@pradpnayak @eileenmcnaughton I've updated the tab count on the subtab to use the same method as the main tab count.
No, I can't reopen PRs and can't do assignments. |
|
@mattwire i will test this and will post my QA results by end of tomorrow. Thanks for the fix. :) |
|
Hi Matt, I tested on current state, the count seems to match with the parent tab. However i found a separate issue https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/issues/277 will submit a PR for it Here's my QA: Good to merge 👍 |
|
I've merged this - Matt is also after feedback on related #12421 |
Overview
Show test memberships for consistency with contributions/recurs. Add text to show if a contribution/recur/membership is a test when viewing details.
See: https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/issues/219
Before
Membership tab:
Membership View (contribution and recur are similar):
After
Membership tab:
Membership View (contribution and recur are similar):
Technical Details
Comments
The lack of visible test memberships easily leads to confusion, especially given that the related contribution/recurring contributions are visible. I have been caught out by this a few times myself, thinking that the memberships were not created (they were, but you have to find them through advanced search and select test memberships.