[ECP-9871] Add capturePspReference to Scalapay refund requests

[candemiralp]

Description

This PR adds the missing required capturePspReference field for the refunds of partially captured payments for Scalapay.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @candemiralp, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request extends the functionality for including the capturePspReference in refund requests to cover Scalapay payment methods, in addition to the existing PayPal implementation. This change ensures that refunds for these payment methods are correctly linked to their original captures within the Adyen system, which is crucial for handling multiple partial captures accurately. The update involves introducing a new configuration flag and a helper method to manage this requirement dynamically.

Highlights

• Extended capturePspReference Logic: The mechanism to include capturePspReference in refund requests, previously specific to PayPal, has been generalized and applied to Scalapay (3x and 4x) payment methods.
• New Helper Method for Refund Requirements: A new helper method, getRefundRequiresCapturePspreference, has been introduced in Helper/PaymentMethods.php to dynamically determine if a payment method requires capturePspReference for refunds based on its configuration.
• Configuration Update: The etc/config.xml file has been updated to include a refund_requires_capture_pspreference flag for PayPal and Scalapay (3x and 4x) payment methods, enabling this new functionality.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request refactors the logic for adding capturePspReference to refund requests, making it configurable per payment method instead of being hardcoded for PayPal. This functionality is also extended to Scalapay. The changes are well-structured, introducing a new configuration flag and a helper method to check it, which makes the implementation in RefundDataBuilder cleaner and more generic. The configuration and helper changes are correct. My main feedback is regarding the unit test for RefundDataBuilder, which was not fully updated to reflect the new generic behavior, leading to incomplete testing of the new logic.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
100.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud