I just committed a small template change that handles this more gracefully.
Basically, it let's the user know there's a problem and that they can't move
forward.

If you want to do a more robust patch feel free to but I don't want you to
waste time on something that's already fixed.

-Chris

On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Alex Robbins <[email protected]
> wrote:

> Yeah, I'll try and get a patch written up some time this week.
>
> Alex
>
> --
> Alex Robbins
> 5Q Communications, Inc.
> http://www.5Qcommunications.com/
> [email protected]
> 800-747-4214 ext 913 (p)
> http://www.ask5q.com/twitter/
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 12:45 PM, Chris Moffitt <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > Alex,
> >
> > If you wouldn't mind putting in a ticket with your thoughts, I'd
> appreciate
> > it. If you have a rough patch you can attach just to get us started.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Chris
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Alex Robbins
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> I think option 1, some pre-address validation, is much better long
> >> term, but a lot harder too. I think validating user entered addresses,
> >> if a shipping backend supports it, would be a really great feature.
> >>
> >> In my project I opted for adding an error message, since it was a lot
> >> easier and I didn't have to mess with satchmo code. The problem is
> >> that I can't be very specific about the reason the address failed.
> >> ("Uhh, something might be wrong with your address. Hopefully you can
> >> guess what it was. Please fix it...") Option 1 would be a lot better.
> >>
> >> Just my 2 cents...
> >> Alex
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Chris Moffitt <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Alex,
> >> >
> >> > It's a good point and one I've thought about myself. One idea I've
> >> > thought
> >> > about is to try to do a pre-address validation request/shipping check
> >> > before
> >> > we move to the shipping choice page. That way we could prevent someone
> >> > from
> >> > even getting there unless the information is correct.
> >> >
> >> > The other option is to display a more friendly error message so that
> the
> >> > user can actually move forward.
> >> >
> >> > I'm open to ideas and do agree it's an issue we should address (nice
> pun
> >> > :)
> >> >
> >> > -Chris
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Alex Robbins
> >> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Right now, if a user inputs a bad address with UPS or USPS shipping
> >> >> modules (and maybe others) there won't be any shipping choices. This
> >> >> is documented.
> >> >>
> >> >> However, the payship form has a clean_shipping method that will fail
> >> >> in this case (since not shipping and self.tempCart.is_shippable). The
> >> >> validation error won't be displayed because the form.shipping_hidden
> =
> >> >> True, but the user will be put back on the payship page. The user
> >> >> doesn't get an error message, but they also can't move forward.
> >> >>
> >> >> It seems to me that we need to handle this explicitly. If
> >> >> cart.is_shippable and len(shipping_choices) == 0 then we have a
> >> >> problem. Maybe we should throw a 500? Maybe we should have an error
> >> >> message ("There are no valid shipping methods. Perhaps you entered
> >> >> your address incorrectly?"). I know it is very difficult to tell why
> >> >> there are no shipping_choices, but it seems like we need to have a
> >> >> plan for this situation.
> >> >>
> >> >> It would be very nice to send them back to the address page with a
> >> >> validation error message on the address form, but that isn't always
> >> >> the source of the error.
> >> >>
> >> >> Any ideas on how we could fix this?
> >> >>
> >> >> Alex
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >> >> Groups
> >> >> "Satchmo users" group.
> >> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >> >> [email protected]<satchmo-users%[email protected]>
> .
> >> >> For more options, visit this group at
> >> >> http://groups.google.com/group/satchmo-users?hl=en.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >> > Groups
> >> > "Satchmo users" group.
> >> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >> > [email protected]<satchmo-users%[email protected]>
> .
> >> > For more options, visit this group at
> >> > http://groups.google.com/group/satchmo-users?hl=en.
> >> >
> >>
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> >> "Satchmo users" group.
> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >> [email protected]<satchmo-users%[email protected]>
> .
> >> For more options, visit this group at
> >> http://groups.google.com/group/satchmo-users?hl=en.
> >>
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Satchmo users" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > [email protected]<satchmo-users%[email protected]>
> .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/group/satchmo-users?hl=en.
> >
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Satchmo users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<satchmo-users%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/satchmo-users?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Satchmo users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/satchmo-users?hl=en.

Reply via email to