Remove legacy references to partial_amount_to_pay #20358
Merged
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
This was an early concept of how to do partial payments that we eliminated a while back in favour of Payment.create It is not set anywhere in core - only checked so time to remove the checks
|
(Standard links)
|
|
Agree. Reviewed the patch, tested on local on some use cases for partial payment using line-item editor. Doesn't seem to cause any regression/incorrect financial entries. |
|
yay - those refs are gone |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Overview
Remove legacy references to partial_amount_to_pay
Before
Value checked but never set any more
After
poof
Technical Details
This was an early concept of how to do partial payments that we eliminated a while back
in favour of Payment.create
It is not set anywhere in core - only checked so time to remove the checks
Comments
@Edzelopez @monishdeb @pradpnayak you probably still recall this parameter & I'm guessing won't miss it....