[solidus_admin] Add payment methods editor

[benjaminwil]

Summary

Replaces #6302.

This pull request adds functionality to allow admins to add, edit, and remove payment methods from the solidus_admin.

Note that I have co-opted most of this work from the original author. I have resolved merge conflicts, ensured linting and tests pass, and so on. I will take responsibility for any issues that come up during code review.

Checklist

Check out our PR guidelines for more details.

The following are mandatory for all PRs:

• I agree that my PR will be published under the same license as Solidus.
• I have written a thorough PR description.
• I have kept my commits small and atomic.
• I have localized any and all user-facing strings that I added to the source code.
• I have used clear, explanatory commit messages.

The following are not always needed:

• 📖 I have updated the README to account for my changes.
• 📑 I have documented new code with YARD.
• 🛣️ I have opened a PR to update the guides.
• ✅ I have added automated tests to cover my changes.
• 📸 I have attached screenshots to demo visual changes.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 92.33%. Comparing base (3e7a91e) to head (bb27342).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #6619   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   92.33%   92.33%           
=======================================
  Files        1050     1053    +3     
  Lines       21369    21382   +13     
=======================================
+ Hits        19731    19744   +13     
  Misses       1638     1638           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[tvdeyen]

Nice

[jarednorman]

Based on a quick review locally:

1. I don't think validation errors are showing up.
2. This doesn't render controls for additional preferences on the payment methods, making it kind of useless for many payment methods.
3. Auto-capture is (sadly) not boolean. Null means something (use store default) and we should let people select that.
4. When a preference source is chosen, the server/test-mode still looks editable even though changes to those are ignored. That's not a great user experience.
5. Probably should sort gateway types in alphabetically or something.
6. Changing a payment method's type on update doesn't convert the record to the new class the way the old admin did.
7. New records no longer preselect the default store. ☹️
8. We should use the shared discard and save button helpers and drop the unused translation keys, and name the HTML hint translations with the _html suffix instead of calling html_safe.
9. I think the description a text area.
10. Can we pull the store and type queries out of the template?
11. We should use the payment method's name as the edit page title.

[benjaminwil]

@jarednorman I intend to add commits for a few of the trivial items here, but I would like to use the SolidusAdmin::.enable_alpha_features? flag and merge the scaffolding as Eugene wrote it. I would like to try to avoid making this a long-lived and giant pull request. I think it will be easier for me, and for code reviewers, to tackle some of these issues in subsequent pull requests.

What do you think about that approach?

[benjaminwil]

1. I don't think validation errors are showing up.

They're showing up for me. Let me know if I've misunderstood. Example:

And I've resolved the following items from your feedback so far:

\5. Probably should sort gateway types in alphabetically or something.
\8. We should use the shared discard and save button helpers and drop the unused translation keys, and name the HTML hint translations with the _html suffix instead of calling html_safe.
\10. Can we pull the store and type queries out of the template?

[jarednorman]

Does it display object-level validation issues?

[jarednorman]

What do you think about that approach?

Fine by me! Just make sure we keep track of all of the above. It's very important that the new admin be the same or better than the old one when it comes to all functionality.

[benjaminwil]

I pasted the following into some core models, like Spree::PaymentMethod and Spree::Zone, to test whether object validation errors were showing up on any of the new admin forms on validation error:

validate :fake_object_level_validation
def fake_object_level_validation
  errors.add(:base, "fake object-level validation error")
end

And it seems like the answer is no.

It's unclear to me whether there's been a regression recently, but I tried this against this branch, against main, and against main as of earlier this week (2294a17d9e).

If you all know this to have been working as expected (flash messages, I'd assume?) and there's been a regression, I can look into it. But I defer to you all who have a deeper knowledge of the current status of the admin.

Edit: I created #6629 to address missing presentation of object-level validation errors.

[jarednorman]

I'm clearly just mistaken about the validation visibility. 😬

[benjaminwil]

I just rebased against the latest main to resolve merge conflicts in the solidus_admin routes file.

[benjaminwil]

Regarding keeping track of the work to be finished:

• I have a copy of the feedback in my local todos.
• I will link back to this pull request in subsequent pull requests that resolve unfinished business.
• I will create issues for any substantive items. I already did this for Surface object-level validation errors in the admin #6629.

[benjaminwil]

@tvdeyen @jarednorman If y'all could prioritize re-reviewing this one and merging it if it's good to go: I intend to keep working on the payment methods UI and basing my next work off of these commits.