Re: [PEPr] Call for votes on Payment::Payment_PayPalSoap

On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Michael Gauthier <mike@silverorange.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 18:08 -0400, till wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Michael Gauthier <mike@silverorange.com> wrote: >> > >> > Michael Gauthier (http://pear.php.net/user/gauthierm) has initiated the call for votes >> > on Payment::Payment_PayPalSoap. >> > >> > Please review the proposal and give your vote here: >> > http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=556 >> >> Hey Michael, >> >> I should have check out the code before the vote, anyway. > > Hi Till, > > Thanks for your interest and feedback! > >> I'm torn because as you say - "by itself this package isn't very >> useful". And I wish it would provide more in terms of API integration. > > My reasons for not including the full PayPal API in this package are: > > 1.) The PayPal SOAP API is well documented and I wouldn't be able to > accurately reproduce this documentation (which is mentioned in the > package documentation). > > 2.) The PayPal SOAP API is described in a WSDL file. If PayPal changes > or updates the API, this package will automagically work with the new or > updated methods. > > One place where I could see a deeper integration being useful is > building orders and order-item structures. Since the PHP structure for > these objects is usually different from project to project I'm not sure > how useful it in in practise. > >> The code itself looks very solid and I see that this can indeed jump >> start you, I just don't think the authorization is the hardest part. I >> had to integrate Paypal six weeks ago and I found it more confusing to >> send all the required information in a request e.g. to create a >> subscription etc. then the authorization part. >> >> Do you plan on extending it in the future, or is this gonna serve as a >> base for a possible addition to Payment_Process? > > I don't plan on adding extra PHP methods to replicate the PayPal API in > the future. I am not opposed to this package being used as a base for a > higher-level API in Payment_Process, but I don't personally have any > interest in doing so. > Thanks for clearing that up. :)