ONDC-Official / v1.2.0-logs

Retail and Logistics Logs for 1.2.0
9 stars 289 forks source link

Aurikatech (SA: RET12) - Compliance Check #1764

Open Jagannath-wits opened 6 months ago

Jagannath-wits commented 6 months ago

Flow 1

on_search_full_catalog_refresh

search_inc_refresh

on_search_inc_refresh

Flow 2

on_init

on_status_delivered

Flow 3

on_select_out_of_stock

Flow 4

on_cancel

Flow 5

on_cancel

Flow 6

on_status_delivered

on_status_picked

on_update_part_cancel

on_update_interim_reverse_qc

on_update_approval- Same as above

on_update_picked

on_update_delivered

@vanshraghav

vanshraghav commented 6 months ago

Hi @Jagannath-wits ,

Can you please clarify our doubts about the below questions?

  1. prvdr0/tags/timing/Delivery: The timings object must be present for Delivery in the tags.

    Regarding this issue, we already have a timing object inside the tags for bpp/providers with type = Order. Do you also want us to add a new timing object with type = Delivery in the API contract, the enums are not provided and in the example, the type is "ALL".Should we use "ALL" instead of type = "Order"? also, can you provide us with all the enums for the same?

  2. Fulfillment type rto end/time should not be present in /on_cancel when state/desc/code is RTO-Initiated Also here we need to remove the end/time when the state is RTO-initiated but in the case of RTO-approved or any other state, do we have to keep this field?

Jagannath-wits commented 6 months ago

Hi @Jagannath-wits ,

Can you please clarify our doubts about the below questions?

  1. prvdr0/tags/timing/Delivery: The timings object must be present for Delivery in the tags. Regarding this issue, we already have a timing object inside the tags for bpp/providers with type = Order. Do you also want us to add a new timing object with type = Delivery in the API contract, the enums are not provided and in the example, the type is "ALL".Should we use "ALL" instead of type = "Order"? also, can you provide us with all the enums for the same?
  1. Fulfillment type rto end/time should not be present in /on_cancel when state/desc/code is RTO-Initiated Also here we need to remove the end/time when the state is RTO-initiated but in the case of RTO-approved or any other state, do we have to keep this field?
    • You have to send an on_staus_rto_delivered after on_cancel_rto_initiated which will have the end.timestamp

@vanshraghav

vanshraghav commented 6 months ago

Hi @Jagannath-wits In on_update_interim_reverse_qc

provider/items/1 : Return fulfillment for the item_id a9fd801c-3673-4305-93fe-78bd7fa95cd2 should be created at on_update_picked

for the above issue the items array contains 2 items one is for the Delivery, another for the part_cancel . We don't add the item for returns in this request. In on_update_picked it was created, so you can also observe that the number of items in the items array increases to 3.

provider/items/0 : Tags are not required in the item with id: a9fd801c-3673-4305-93fe-78bd7fa95cd2

Also here the tags are only available for the Delivery item not for the cancelled item or return item .

Jagannath-wits commented 6 months ago

Hi @Jagannath-wits In on_update_interim_reverse_qc

provider/items/1 : Return fulfillment for the item_id a9fd801c-3673-4305-93fe-78bd7fa95cd2 should be created at on_update_picked

for the above issue the items array contains 2 items one is for the Delivery, another for the part_cancel . We don't add the item for returns in this request. In on_update_picked it was created, so you can also observe that the number of items in the items array increases to 3.

provider/items/0 : Tags are not required in the item with id: a9fd801c-3673-4305-93fe-78bd7fa95cd2

Also here the tags are only available for the Delivery item not for the cancelled item or return item .

  • But it is not required i.e its only required when you have a customization along with it, but since this is just item from beginning it is not required here. So for standalone SKU's item.tag is not required .
pareenjain commented 5 months ago

@Jagannath-wits we have made all the above fixes and the changes have been merged in this PR. Can you please review and confirm if we can get Tech Log clearance for our retail flows? cc: @vanshraghav

Jagannath-wits commented 5 months ago

Flow 1

on_search_full_catalog_refresh

on_status_picked

Flow 4

on_cancel

Flow 5

on_cancel

Flow 6

on_status_picked

on_init

confirm

on_update_part_cancel

update_settlement_part_cancel

on_update_interim_reverse_qc

on_update_approval

on_update_picked

on_update_delivered

rtoFFObj/end/time: Fulfillment type rto end/time should not be present in /on_cancel when state/desc/code is RTO-Initiated.

  • Why hasn't this been resolved before submitting for reiteration ? Also please provide an on_status_rto-delivered or rto-disposed after on-cancel. Please refer to Contract for more clarification also submit the utility response and payload for each flow in next iteration.

@vanshraghav

vanshraghav commented 5 months ago

Hi @Jagannath-wits ,

  1. The image url ( https://test-ondc.s3-ap-south-1.amazonaws.com/9c5da599-6978-4fa4-9d33-b091f988af4d/product_image/021 (1).png ) is accessible . You should try copy pasting the whole url .

  2. What should be the return_window value for non-returnable items?

  3. Also for item/tags: "Tags are not required in order/items" . Is the tags are also not required in the on_init,on_confirm or any other call or are they not only required in on_cancel.

  4. Also For the below issues

returnFF/start/person/name: "returnFF/start/person/name is not a required attribute as per the API contract" returnFF/start/time/range/: "returnFF/start/time/range/ is not a required attribute as per the API contract" returnFF/end/time/range/: "returnFF/end/time/range/ is not a required attribute as per the API contract" returnFF/start/time/timestamp: "start/time/timestamp of return fulfillment should be in the valid time/range as in on_update_approval"

Why these were not flagged in the first iteration only ? we should have fixed them also in the first go only.

As for your question rtoFFObj/end/time: Fulfillment type rto end/time should not be present in /on_cancel when state/desc/code is RTO-Initiated.

We will resolve this issue surely in this iteration , we missed this in the previous one .

pareenjain commented 5 months ago

@Jagannath-wits we have fixed all the above issues and are changes have been merged. Can you please review our logs now?

Jagannath-wits commented 5 months ago

Aurikatech

Flow 1

on_search

Flow 2

On_init

Only @ondc/org/buyer_app_finder_fee_type, @ondc/org/buyer_app_finder_fee_amount,@ondc/org/settlement_details are required in payment object as only buyer is collecting payment currently. Incase seller wants to collect the payment then you can send it the way you sent but then it wont change in confirm call; right now payment is only accepted by buyer on network so the payment object in confirm is correct item/tags/type in items is not required for standalone SKUs (non-customizable)

Flow 3

on_select_oos

Select multiple items for flow 3 as mentioned in rollout plan

Flow 5

on_cancel

You can charge for delivery in this as the order was already out for delivery returnFF/start/person/name: "returnFF/start/person/name is not a required attribute as per the API contract"(repeated) returnFF/start/time/range/: "returnFF/start/time/range/ is not a required attribute as per the API contract"(repeated) returnFF/end/time/range/: "returnFF/end/time/range/ is not a required attribute as per the API contract"(repeated)

Flow 6

/on_update (part cancel)

on_status_picked

Invoice should’ve been updated after part-cancel (repeated)

@vanshraghav

pareenjain commented 5 months ago

@Jagannath-wits we have fixed all the above issues and are changes have been merged. Can you please review our logs now?

Jagannath-wits commented 5 months ago

Flow 1

On_search

Flow 4

on_init

Flow 6

on_init

on_status_out_for_delivery

@vanshraghav please fix repeated issues in next iteration

sandeepshahi commented 5 months ago

Flow 1

/on_search

/on_search (inc)

Flow 2

/on_init

/on_confirm

/on_status

Flow 3

/on_select

Flow 4

/on_cancel

Flow 5

/on_cancel

Flow 6

/on_status (pending)

/on_update (part cancel)

/on_update (approved)

/on_update (picked)

@vanshraghav

pareenjain commented 5 months ago
  1. @sandeepshahi regarding the last two errors you flagged in /on_update (picked), they make sense.
  2. But that also means that the last two errors that @Jagannath-wits had flagged in this comment should have been returnFF/end/time and returnFF/end/person instead of /start. Can you please confirm if my understanding is correct? image
Jagannath-wits commented 5 months ago
  1. @sandeepshahi regarding the last two errors you flagged in /on_update (picked), they make sense.
  2. But that also means that the last two errors that @Jagannath-wits had flagged in this comment should have been returnFF/end/time and returnFF/end/person instead of /start. Can you please confirm if my understanding is correct?

- No, in those logs details were provided in start which was not required as mentioned @pareenjain

pareenjain commented 5 months ago
  1. @Jagannath-wits does that mean we need to remove returnFF/start/time/range, returnFF/end/time/timestamp, returnFF/start/person/name as well as returnFF/end/person?
  2. Why isn't returnFF/start/person/name required in on_update (picked)? Shouldn't it contain the buyer name?
pareenjain commented 4 months ago

@Jagannath-wits @sandeepshahi can you please respond to the above?

pareenjain commented 4 months ago

@sandeepshahi @Jagannath-wits we have addressed these issues, and the logs were merged in this PR. Can you please review these?

cc: @MishraTanishq619

Jagannath-wits commented 4 months ago

Flow 1

on_search

on_search_inc

Flow 3

on_select_out_of_stock

Flow 5

on_cancel_rto

on_status_rto_delivered

Flow 6

on_update_part_cancel

@pareenjain

pareenjain commented 4 months ago

Flow 6 on_update_part_cancel Item Object Update: The item object is not updated after a part cancel.

@Jagannath-wits @sandeepshahi I think our items is being updated correctly only; we're part cancelling 2 items of the 5 items - no? image (3) image (4)

image
Jagannath-wits commented 4 months ago

Flow 6 on_update_part_cancel Item Object Update: The item object is not updated after a part cancel.

  • @Jagannath-wits @sandeepshahi I think our items is being updated correctly only; we're part cancelling 2 items of the 5 items - no?

Acknowledged

pareenjain commented 4 months ago

@sandeepshahi @Jagannath-wits we have addressed https://github.com/ONDC-Official/v1.2.0-logs/issues/1764#issuecomment-2252829616, and the logs were merged in the PR https://github.com/ONDC-Official/v1.2.0-logs/pull/2166. Can you please review our logs?

cc: @MishraTanishq619

sandeepshahi commented 3 months ago

Flow 1

/on_search

/on_search (inc)

Flow 2

/on_init

/on_status

Flow 3

Flow 5

/on_cancel

Flow 6

/on_update (part cancel)

/on_update (approved)

/on_update (picked)

@pareenjain

pareenjain commented 3 months ago
  1. _Flow 5 /on_cancel industry standard for delivery attempt is 3; is retrycount = "1" intended? Yes this one is intended because our offline logistics partner will attempt the delivery only twice. So we've kept retry_count = 1.

  2. _Flow 6 /onupdate (part cancel) Probably we miss something on Flow 6 after on_confirm. After on_confirm,

    • Should the seller first accept the order, and then part cancel the order?
    • If yes, we will be sending on_status_pending (order state = "Accepted") with the initial order - correct?
    • Then after that we should be sending on_update_part_cancel; what will be order state here? Will it not be "Created"? If not "Created", the order state will not be "Created" in the entire flow - correct? In your previous comment, you had mentioned - order state can't move from "Accepted" to "Created"
    • After on_update_part_cancel, should the seller again accept the updated order to send another on_status_pending (with order state again as "Accepted")?
sandeepshahi commented 3 months ago
  1. Flow 5: Ok
  2. Flow 6: The order state will remain "Accepted" in /on_update and no need to resend the "Accepted" /on_status call.

@pareenjain, also, make sure the fees and charges in quote/breakup are feasible and not placeholder values

pareenjain commented 3 months ago

Changes merged in this PR.

sandeepshahi commented 3 months ago

Flow 1

/on_search

/on_search (inc)

Flow 2

/on_status

Flow 3

common issues:

@pareenjain, please resubmit logs for Flow 3 and answer the above mentioned queries

pareenjain commented 3 months ago

Flow 1 /on_search (inc) are all the scenarios of incremental call supported as mentioned in the contract?

As of now, we are only supporting item updates in incremental search. We plan to extend support to Scenarios 2-5 as well (i.e., all scenarios except offers), but hopefully that doesn't become a blocker for us to roll-out our MVP in Prod because the remaining scenarios should be taken care of in the full catalog search requests.

Flow 2 /on_status Pending: for above point, isn't delivery TAT being calculated dynamically? should be calculated as per the pickup and delivery location

We are calculating delivery TAT dynamically based on the pickup and delivery pincodes.

pareenjain commented 3 months ago

@sandeepshahi - we raised this PR resubmitting logs for Flow 1, 2, 3 - fixing all the above issues you've highlighted.

If you can merge this and let us know if our logs can now be approved for preprod.

sandeepshahi commented 3 months ago

/on_status

@pareenjain, Please resolve the above issue and complete the pending submissions on the NP Portal for QA.

pareenjain commented 3 months ago

/on_status delivery TAT is mentioned as 3 days, but estimated ranges show 5 days to deliver the order (14th Aug to 19th Aug)

@sandeepshahi on the above, we have ensured a 3-day TAT between:

Isn't this correct?