* feat: carry over promotions toggle on exchanges
* fix: inital flag value, return the flag on preview
* fix: validation of allocation type
* fix: revert client changes
* fix: invert condition
* feat: recompute adjustments when outbound item is updated
* fix: condition again
* fix: display more accurate inbound/outbound totals for exchanges
* fix: make exchanges specs green
* feat: more testing cases
* wip: pr feedback
* fix: use plural for the flag on Admin
* fix: schema test, route refactor
* feat: tooltip
* feat: refactor to use update workflow
* feat: display applied promotion per item on order details, show copy sku on hover
* feat: refactor edits and exchanges to have common flag toggle flow
* fix: delete empty file
* fix: exchange_id param query
* wip
* add wip
* wip
* reuse action
* finish first draft
* fix tests
* cleanup
* Only compute adjustments when necessary
* Create hot-carrots-look.md
* address comments
* minor tweaks
* fix pay col
* fix test
* wip
* Dwip
* wip
* fix: adjustment typo
* fix: import
* fix: workflow imports
* wip: update test
* feat: upsert versioned adjustments when previewing order
* fix: revert unique codes change
* fix: order spec test with versioning
* wip: save
* feat: make adjustments work for preview and confirm flow, wip base repo filtering of older version adjustments
* fix: missing populate where
* wip: populate where loading versioned adjustments
* fix: filter out older adjustment versions
* temp: comment adjustments in repo
* test: add adjustment if no version
* wip: configure populate where in order base repository
* fix: rm manual filtering
* fix: revert base repo changes
* fix: revert
* fix: use order item version instead of order version
* fix: rm only in test
* fix: update case spec
* fix: remove sceanrio, wip test with draft promotion
* feat: test correct adjustments when disabling promotion
* feat: complex test case
* feat: test consecutive order edits
* feat: 2 promotions test case with a fixed promo
* feat: migrate existing order line item adjustments to order items latest version
* feat: update dep after merge
* wip: load adjustments separatley
* feat: adjustments collections
* fix: spread result, handle related entity case
* fix: update lock
* feat: make sure version is loaded, refactor, handle related entity case
* fix: check fields
* feat: loading adjustments for list and count
* fix: correct items version field
* fix: rm empty array
* fix: wip order modules spec
* fix: order module specs
* feat: preinit items adjustments
* fix: rm only
* fix: rm only
* chore: cleanup
* fix: migration files
* fix: dont change formatting
* fix: core package build
* chore: more cleanup
* fix: item update util
* fix: duplicate import
* fix: refresh adjustments for exchanges (#13992)
* wip: exchange adjustments
* feat: test - receive items
* feat: finish test case
* fix: casing
* fix(draft-orders, core-flows, orders) refresh adjustments for draft orders (#14025)
* wip: draft orders adjustments refresh
* feat: rewrite to use REPLACE action + test
* fix: rm only
* feat: cleanup old REPLACE actions
* feat: cleanup adjustemnts when 0 promotions
* wip: canceling draft order
* fix: make version arg optional
* fix: restore promotion links
* feat: test reverting on cancelation
* fix: address comments in tests
* wip: fix summary on preview
* fix: get pending diff on preview summary from total
* fix: revert pending diff change
---------
Co-authored-by: fPolic <mainacc.polic@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Frane Polić <16856471+fPolic@users.noreply.github.com>
## Summary
**What** —
Add a providerData field to notifications
**Why** —
We need the ability to pass dynamic fields to specific providers. E.g. CC and BCC for emails
**How** —
Just adding the field to the model
**Testing** —
Added the field to existing tests
## Checklist
Please ensure the following before requesting a review:
- [x] I have added a **changeset** for this PR
- Every non-breaking change should be marked as a **patch**
- To add a changeset, run `yarn changeset` and follow the prompts
- [x] The changes are covered by relevant **tests**
- [x] I have verified the code works as intended locally
- [ ] I have linked the related issue(s) if applicable
---
> [!NOTE]
> Adds `provider_data` to notifications (types, workflow input, DB model/migration) and forwards it in the Medusa Cloud Email provider, with tests updated accordingly.
>
> - **Data/Schema**:
> - Add `provider_data` (`jsonb`) to `notification` model and DB via migration `Migration20251121150408` and snapshot update.
> - **Types/DTOs**:
> - Add optional `provider_data` to `CreateNotificationDTO`, `NotificationDTO`, and `ProviderSendNotificationDTO`.
> - **Workflows**:
> - Extend `send-notifications` step input with `provider_data`.
> - **Providers**:
> - Medusa Cloud Email: include `provider_data` in outgoing request payload.
> - **Tests**:
> - Update integration tests to pass and assert `provider_data` propagation.
> - **Changeset**:
> - Patch bumps for `@medusajs/notification`, `@medusajs/core-flows`, `@medusajs/types`.
>
> <sup>Written by [Cursor Bugbot](https://cursor.com/dashboard?tab=bugbot) for commit 6f114c75c974a145ef60213637d7c41bc605a0bf. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure [here](https://cursor.com/dashboard?tab=bugbot).</sup>
## Summary
**What** — What changes are introduced in this PR?
This pull request adds support for OXXO payments to the Stripe payment provider module. The main changes include the addition of a new `OxxoProviderService`, updates to type definitions to support OXXO-specific options, and integration of the new service into the provider's exports and registration.
**Why** — Why are these changes relevant or necessary?
I was testing the MedusaJs server, I live in México and here oxxo as a Payment method is very used.
**How** — How have these changes been implemented?
* Introduced `OxxoProviderService` in `stripe-oxxo.ts`, which extends `StripeBase` and configures Stripe payment intents for OXXO, including expiration settings.
* Updated `StripeOptions` and `PaymentIntentOptions` types to include `oxxoExpiresDays` and OXXO-specific payment method options for intent configuration.
* Added `OXXO` to the `PaymentProviderKeys` enum for provider identification.
**Testing** — How have these changes been tested, or how can the reviewer test the feature?
You need to launch the medusa server, add Stripe OXXO as Payment Provider in your Store Region (OXXO only works in México and with mxn currency) and set payment_method_data type to oxxo.
Also you need to allow oxxo payment as payment method in stripe and configure your stripe webhook to your medusa server
---
## Examples
Provide examples or code snippets that demonstrate how this feature works, or how it can be used in practice.
This helps with documentation and ensures maintainers can quickly understand and verify the change.
```ts
// Example usage using nextjs starter
const confirmParams: any = {
return_url: returnUrl,
}
if (isOxxo(providerId)) {
confirmParams.payment_method_data = {
type: "oxxo",
billing_details: {
name:
cart.billing_address?.first_name +
" " +
cart.billing_address?.last_name,
address: {
city: cart.billing_address?.city ?? undefined,
country: cart.billing_address?.country_code ?? undefined,
line1: cart.billing_address?.address_1 ?? undefined,
line2: cart.billing_address?.address_2 ?? undefined,
postal_code: cart.billing_address?.postal_code ?? undefined,
state: cart.billing_address?.province ?? undefined,
},
email: cart.email,
phone: cart.billing_address?.phone ?? undefined,
},
}
await stripe
.confirmPayment({
clientSecret,
confirmParams,
redirect: "if_required",
})
.then(({ error, paymentIntent }) => {
console.log({ error, paymentIntent })
const validateIntent = async (paymentIntent: any) => {
const link =
paymentIntent.next_action?.oxxo_display_details
?.hosted_voucher_url
if (link) {
setSubmitting(false)
setMessage(
"Se ha generado un cupón de pago de OXXO. Por favor, revisa la nueva pestaña abierta."
)
await onPaymentCompleted() // Here I call the function because I have custom logic for creating a pending order
}
}
if (error) {
const pi = error.payment_intent
if (
(pi && pi.status === "requires_capture") ||
(pi && pi.status === "succeeded")
) {
onPaymentCompleted()
}
if (pi && pi.status === "requires_action") {
validateIntent(pi)
return
}
setErrorMessage(error.message || null)
setSubmitting(false)
return
}
if (
(paymentIntent && paymentIntent.status === "requires_capture") ||
(paymentIntent && paymentIntent.status === "succeeded")
) {
return onPaymentCompleted()
}
if (paymentIntent && paymentIntent.status === "requires_action") {
validateIntent(paymentIntent) // This is the action that you normally get
}
})
}
}
// Configuration on the server (medusa-config.ts)
modules: [
{
resolve: "@medusajs/medusa/payment",
options: {
providers: [
{
resolve: "@medusa/payment-stripe",
id: "stripe",
options: {
apiKey: process.env.STRIPE_API_KEY,
webhookSecret: process.env.STRIPE_WEBHOOK_SECRET,
capture: true,
oxxoExpiresDays: 7, // default to 3
},
},
],
},
},
],
// And not necessary buy you can extend even more creating a pending-orders module (for showing the vouchers created that costumer need to pay in the frontend, because if not the order only creates after the user have payed the voucher, for testing is 3 minutes), this is an example model:
import { model } from "@medusajs/framework/utils";
export const PendingOrder = model.define("pending_order", {
id: model.id().primaryKey(),
cart_id: model.text().unique(),
user_id: model.text(),
total: model.number(),
payment_type: model.text(),
voucher_url: model.text().nullable(),
payment_session_id: model.text(), // this are the ones that works to identify the payment
payment_collection_id: model.text(), // this are the ones that works to identify the payment
});
export default PendingOrder;
```
---
## Checklist
Please ensure the following before requesting a review:
- [x] I have added a **changeset** for this PR
- Every non-breaking change should be marked as a **patch**
- To add a changeset, run `yarn changeset` and follow the prompts
- [x] The changes are covered by relevant **tests**
- [x] I have verified the code works as intended locally
- [x ] I have linked the related issue(s) if applicable
---
## Additional Context
#13804
---
> [!NOTE]
> Adds OXXO payment support to the Stripe provider with configurable expiration days and updates intent option handling and typings.
>
> - **Payment Providers**:
> - **New `OxxoProviderService`** (`services/stripe-oxxo.ts`): configures `payment_intent` for OXXO with `expires_after_days` (defaults to `3`, configurable via `options.oxxoExpiresDays`).
> - Registered in `src/index.ts` and exported from `services/index.ts`.
> - **Types**:
> - `StripeOptions` adds `oxxoExpiresDays`.
> - `PaymentIntentOptions` adds `payment_method_options.oxxo.expires_after_days`.
> - `PaymentProviderKeys` adds `OXXO`.
> - **Core**:
> - `core/stripe-base.ts`: `normalizePaymentIntentParameters` now falls back to `this.paymentIntentOptions.payment_method_options` when not provided in `extra`.
> - **Changeset**:
> - Patch release for `@medusajs/payment-stripe`.
>
> <sup>Written by [Cursor Bugbot](https://cursor.com/dashboard?tab=bugbot) for commit 4d7fe0658b91e6948f011a73d77a6281c85cdd26. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure [here](https://cursor.com/dashboard?tab=bugbot).</sup>
Co-authored-by: William Bouchard <46496014+willbouch@users.noreply.github.com>
## Summary
**What** — What changes are introduced in this PR?
- Add missing `images` field of variants to the HTTP types
- Add missing `thumbnail` field to product variant schema, which leads to the thumbnail missing from auto generated types
**Why** — Why are these changes relevant or necessary?
*Please provide answer here*
**How** — How have these changes been implemented?
*Please provide answer here*
**Testing** — How have these changes been tested, or how can the reviewer test the feature?
*Please provide answer here*
---
## Examples
Provide examples or code snippets that demonstrate how this feature works, or how it can be used in practice.
This helps with documentation and ensures maintainers can quickly understand and verify the change.
```ts
// Example usage
```
---
## Checklist
Please ensure the following before requesting a review:
- [ ] I have added a **changeset** for this PR
- Every non-breaking change should be marked as a **patch**
- To add a changeset, run `yarn changeset` and follow the prompts
- [ ] The changes are covered by relevant **tests**
- [ ] I have verified the code works as intended locally
- [ ] I have linked the related issue(s) if applicable
---
## Additional Context
Add any additional context, related issues, or references that might help the reviewer understand this PR.
* chore(): Cleanup and organize deps
* chore(): Cleanup and organize deps
* chore(): Cleanup and organize deps
* chore(): Cleanup and organize deps
* chore(): Cleanup and organize deps
* chore(): Cleanup and organize deps
* Create lucky-poets-scream.md
* chore(): Cleanup and organize deps
* chore(): Cleanup and organize deps
* chore(): Cleanup and organize deps
* chore(): Cleanup and organize deps
* dedupe snapshot this build
* split into 4 shard
* re configure packages integration tests
* re configure packages integration tests
* re configure packages integration tests
* re configure packages integration tests
* update scripts
* update scripts
* update scripts
* update scripts
* update scripts
* update scripts
* update scripts
* update scripts
* reduce shard for packages
* feat(index): Add support to trigger sync manually
* feat(index): Add API route to interact with
* feat(index): Add API route to interact with
* feat(index): Add API route to interact with
* test(): Add http integration tests
* Create weak-elephants-reply.md
* feat(): version order credit lines
* undo last change
* adjust where
* remove date on ui
* Create five-donuts-obey.md
* add test
* nit comment
* woops
## Summary
**What** — What changes are introduced in this PR?
This PR fixes a bug where async workflow steps with retry intervals would get stuck after the first retry attempt due to Bull queue jobId collisions preventing retry jobs from executing.
**Why** — Why are these changes relevant or necessary?
Workflows using async steps with retry configurations (e.g., `retryInterval: 1`, `maxRetries: 5`) would fail once, schedule a retry, but the retry job would never execute, causing workflows to hang indefinitely.
**How** — How have these changes been implemented?
**Root Cause:** Bull queue was rejecting retry jobs because they had identical jobIds to the async execution jobs that already completed. Both used the format: `retry:workflow:transaction:step_id:attempts`.
**Solution:** Modified `getJobId()` in `workflow-orchestrator-storage.ts` to append a `:retry` suffix when `interval > 0`, creating unique jobIds:
- Async execution (interval=0): `retry:...:step_id:1`
- Retry scheduling (interval>0): `retry:...:step_id:1:retry`
Updated methods: `getJobId()`, `scheduleRetry()`, `removeJob()`, and `clearRetry()` to pass and handle the interval parameter.
**Testing** — How have these changes been tested, or how can the reviewer test the feature?
Added integration test `retry-interval.spec.ts` that verifies:
1. Step with `retryInterval: 1` and `maxRetries: 3` executes 3 times
2. Retry intervals are approximately 1 second between attempts
3. Workflow completes successfully after retries
4. Uses proper async workflow completion pattern with `subscribe()` and `onFinish` event
---
## Examples
```ts
// Example workflow step that would previously get stuck
export const testRetryStep = createStep(
{
name: "test-retry-step",
async: true,
retryInterval: 1, // 1 second retry interval
maxRetries: 3,
},
async (input: any) => {
// Simulate failure on first 2 attempts
if (attempts < 3) {
throw new Error("Temporary failure - will retry")
}
return { success: true }
}
)
// Before fix: Step would fail once, schedule retry, but retry job never fired (jobId collision)
// After fix: Step properly retries up to 3 times with 1-second intervals
```
---
## Checklist
Please ensure the following before requesting a review:
- [ ] I have added a **changeset** for this PR
- Every non-breaking change should be marked as a **patch**
- To add a changeset, run `yarn changeset` and follow the prompts
- [ ] The changes are covered by relevant **tests**
- [ ] I have verified the code works as intended locally
- [ ] I have linked the related issue(s) if applicable
---
## Additional Context
-
Co-authored-by: Carlos R. L. Rodrigues <37986729+carlos-r-l-rodrigues@users.noreply.github.com>
Fixes#13735
### What
This Pull Request introduces new database migrations to remove multiple redundant indexes across several core modules, including product, cart, order, customer, and inventory.
### Why
As detailed in issue #13735, a fresh Medusa installation produces numerous "Duplicate Index" warnings. These legacy indexes add unnecessary write overhead and provide no performance benefit. This PR cleans up the schema to resolve these warnings and improve database health.
### How
I have added one new, reversible migration file for each of the five affected modules:
- `@medusajs/product`
- `@medusajs/cart`
- `@medusajs/order`
- `@medusajs/customer`
- `@medusajs/inventory`
Each migration's `up()` method safely drops the older, redundant index, and its `down()` method re-creates it, ensuring the change is fully reversible and non-destructive.
### Testing
I have tested these migrations by following the local development workflow outlined in the `CONTRIBUTING.md` guide.
1. **Setup:**
* Cloned my forked Medusa repository locally .
* Created a separate, fresh test project using `npx create-medusa-app@latest my-medusa-store`.
* The test project's PostgreSQL database, which already contained the schema with the duplicate indexes.
2. **Linking Local Source Code:**
* In the test project's `package.json`, I modified all `@medusajs/*` dependencies and resolutions to point to the local packages in my forked repository (e.g., `"@medusajs/product": "file:../medusa/packages/modules/product"`).
* From the test project's directory, I ran `yarn install` to link the local, modified Medusa source code into its `node_modules`.
3. **Build & Migration:**
* Inside my forked Medusa repository, I ran `yarn build` to compile the new TypeScript migration files.
* From the root of the **test project**, I then executed the migration command: `npx medusa migration run`.
4. **Verification:**
* The command successfully identified and ran only the new migration files I had created.
* I also confirmed via direct SQL queries that the old, redundant indexes were correctly dropped from all affected tables (`product_collection`, `customer_group`, etc.).
## Summary
**What** — What changes are introduced in this PR?
Add a method in the Tax Module's servie to retrieve a provider by its ID.
**Why** — Why are these changes relevant or necessary?
The Tax Module Provider could be used for use cases other than calculating tax lines. For example, Avalara supports importing products to manage product-specific taxes. However, it's not possible right now to listen to the `product.created` event and create the product in Avalara with its provider. Instead, you'll have to create a separate module that also connects to Avalara and resolve it in the subsriber.
This also matches the pattern in the Analytics Module, which allows retrieving the underlying provider.
**How** — How have these changes been implemented?
Add a `getProvider` method to the Tax Module's service and its interface.
**Testing** — How have these changes been tested, or how can the reviewer test the feature?
Added integration test for the method.
---
## Examples
Provide examples or code snippets that demonstrate how this feature works, or how it can be used in practice.
This helps with documentation and ensures maintainers can quickly understand and verify the change.
```ts
const avalaraProvider = taxModuleService.getProvider("tp_avalara_avalara")
```
---
## Checklist
Please ensure the following before requesting a review:
- [x] I have added a **changeset** for this PR
- Every non-breaking change should be marked as a **patch**
- To add a changeset, run `yarn changeset` and follow the prompts
- [x] The changes are covered by relevant **tests**
- [x] I have verified the code works as intended locally
- [ ] I have linked the related issue(s) if applicable
---
## Additional Context
Add any additional context, related issues, or references that might help the reviewer understand this PR.
### What
Add a new `once` allocation strategy to promotions that limits application to a maximum number of items across the entire cart, rather than per line item.
### Why
Merchants want to create promotions that apply to a limited number of items across the entire cart. For example:
- "Get $10 off, applied to one item only"
- "20% off up to 2 items in your cart"
Current allocation strategies:
- `each`: Applies to each line item independently (respects `max_quantity` per item)
- `across`: Distributes proportionally across all items
Neither supports limiting total applications across the entire cart.
### How
Add `once` to the `ApplicationMethodAllocation` enum.
Behavior:
- Applies promotion to maximum `max_quantity` items across entire cart
- Always prioritizes lowest-priced eligible items first
- Distributes sequentially across items until quota exhausted
- Requires `max_quantity` field to be set
### Example Usage
**Scenario 1: Fixed discount**
```javascript
{
type: "fixed",
allocation: "once",
value: 10, // $10 off
max_quantity: 2 // Apply to 2 items max across cart
}
Cart:
- Item A: 3 units @ $100/unit
- Item B: 5 units @ $50/unit (lowest price)
Result: $20 discount on Item B (2 units × $10)
```
**Scenario 2: Distribution across items**
```javascript
{
type: "fixed",
allocation: "once",
value: 5,
max_quantity: 4
}
Cart:
- Item A: 2 units @ $50/unit
- Item B: 3 units @ $60/unit
Result:
- Item A: $10 discount (2 units × $5)
- Item B: $10 discount (2 units × $5, remaining quota)
```
**Scenario 3: Percentage discount - single item**
```javascript
{
type: "percentage",
allocation: "once",
value: 20, // 20% off
max_quantity: 3 // Apply to 3 items max
}
Cart:
- Item A: 5 units @ $100/unit
- Item B: 4 units @ $50/unit (lowest price)
Result: $30 discount on Item B (3 units × $50 × 20% = $30)
```
**Scenario 4: Percentage discount - distributed across items**
```javascript
{
type: "percentage",
allocation: "once",
value: 15, // 15% off
max_quantity: 5
}
Cart:
- Item A: 2 units @ $40/unit (lowest price)
- Item B: 4 units @ $80/unit
Result:
- Item A: $12 discount (2 units × $40 × 15% = $12)
- Item B: $36 discount (3 units × $80 × 15% = $36, remaining quota)
Total: $48 discount
```
**Scenario 5: Percentage with max_quantity = 1**
```javascript
{
type: "percentage",
allocation: "once",
value: 25, // 25% off
max_quantity: 1 // Only one item
}
Cart:
- Item A: 3 units @ $60/unit
- Item B: 2 units @ $30/unit (lowest price)
Result: $7.50 discount on Item B (1 unit × $30 × 25%)
```
**What**
- implement promotion usage limits per customer/email
- fix registering spend usage over the limit
- fix type errors in promotion module tests
**How**
- introduce a new type of campaign budget that can be defined by an attribute such as customer id or email
- add `CampaignBudgetUsage` entity to keep track of the number of uses per attribute value
- update `registerUsage` and `computeActions` in the promotion module to work with the new type
- update `core-flows` to pass context needed for usage calculation to the promotion module
**Breaking**
- registering promotion usage now throws (and cart complete fails) if the budget limit is exceeded or if the cart completion would result in a breached limit
---
CLOSES CORE-1172
CLOSES CORE-1173
CLOSES CORE-1174
CLOSES CORE-1175
Co-authored-by: Adrien de Peretti <25098370+adrien2p@users.noreply.github.com>
