[bop-devel] Proposed - Barclaycard EPDQextra Plus API Direct Link Integration

[Ivan Kohler]

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 04:26:14PM +0000, Simon Waters wrote:
>
> Do any of the existing modules do anything along these lines already?

https://metacpan.org/requires/distribution/XML-Simple lists PaymenTech, 
IPPay and Litle also using XML::Simple.


> All the modules seem to split protocol, server, path for the
> connection.  Is that an SSLeay thing, as the LWP::UserAgent approach
> can be just strings. Do BOP authors care?  [...]
> 
> Should I be using Business::OnlinePayments::HTTPS

I would call it a "nice to have", but probably the least important thing 
in notes_for_module_writers_v3.  Problems with one or other of the SSL 
modules are less common than they used to be.

I'd like to ask Ivan from 7 years ago why he thought it should be at the 
top with exclamation marks.


> I'm not 100% clear only having used AuthorizeNet and WorldPay
> modules precisely what the "standard" HASH input we should be aiming
> at is for BOP.

http://search.cpan.org/dist/Business-OnlinePayment/OnlinePayment.pm#content%28%content%29

AuthorizeNet was the first module and in the past was probably the 
canonical source of standard keys and value formatting.  The code itself 
has grown too much to recommend as a starting point for new modules.

Taking a quick look the docs, WorldPay does appear to have a few 
inconsistancies wrt standard fields: "exp_date" instead of the standard 
"expiration", "cvc" instead of the standard "cvv2".


> I appreciate we can't guarantee to preserve every details since
> different processors require different information, but those two
> modules has some minor differences which seemed unnecessary to me.
> For example "expiry date" should it be "YYMM"

"MM/YY".  I have now documented this in the base B:OP documentation and 
corrected the example.


> I presume the goal is to make
> it an interchangeable as possible or what's the point...

Right.  


> If I produce something that is useful to other folks can I get it
> uploaded by someone, or do I go down becoming a CPAN author (I know
> Barbie - so I'm sure he'll provide even more frank advice than usual
> if I go that route...).

I would be happy to upload if otherwise it would not be available, but I 
would certainly certainly encourage you to go ahead get a CPAN ID and 
upload it yourself.  There is a minimum of bureaucracy involved, and you 
get a nifty gravitar and your own bug reports.  
http://pause.perl.org/pause/query?ACTION=request_id


-- 
_ivan