fix: property and event name mappings in shopify v2 #3941
Conversation
|
Test report for this run is available at: https://test-integrations-dev.s3.amazonaws.com/integrations-test-reports/rudder-transformer/3941/test-report.html |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #3941 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 90.48% 90.50% +0.01%
===========================================
Files 615 620 +5
Lines 32359 32524 +165
Branches 7687 7711 +24
===========================================
+ Hits 29281 29435 +154
- Misses 2822 2865 +43
+ Partials 256 224 -32 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
| search_submitted: 'Search Submitted', | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| const RUDDER_ECOM_MAP = { | ||
| checkouts_create: 'Checkout Started Server', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Checkout Started Webhook makes more sense ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, LMK if we should do it
| @@ -1,9 +1,6 @@ | |||
| const { isDefinedAndNotNull } = require('@rudderstack/integrations-lib'); | |||
| const { constructPayload } = require('../../../../v0/util'); | |||
| const { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are we mapping any additional fields in the new flow or the old tracker flow is not inline with ecomm spec ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
old flow was not inline with the spec, reusing them got us some bugs in the QA, mainly with the data types. Hence separated it out
|
What are the changes introduced in this PR?
property and event name mappings in shopify pixel transformations
What is the related Linear task?
Resolves INT-3026, INT-3021, INT-2838
Please explain the objectives of your changes below
Put down any required details on the broader aspect of your changes. If there are any dependent changes, mandatorily mention them here
Any changes to existing capabilities/behaviour, mention the reason & what are the changes ?
N/A
Any new dependencies introduced with this change?
N/A
Any new generic utility introduced or modified. Please explain the changes.
N/A
Any technical or performance related pointers to consider with the change?
N/A
@coderabbitai review
Developer checklist
My code follows the style guidelines of this project
No breaking changes are being introduced.
All related docs linked with the PR?
All changes manually tested?
Any documentation changes needed with this change?
Is the PR limited to 10 file changes?
Is the PR limited to one linear task?
Are relevant unit and component test-cases added in new readability format?
Reviewer checklist
Is the type of change in the PR title appropriate as per the changes?
Verified that there are no credentials or confidential data exposed with the changes.