Skip to content

CEXT-6229: Extend OutOfProcessTotalsCollector to support custom fee total types#562

Merged
keharper merged 6 commits into
AdobeDocs:mainfrom
oshmyheliuk:custom-fees
Jun 5, 2026
Merged

CEXT-6229: Extend OutOfProcessTotalsCollector to support custom fee total types#562
keharper merged 6 commits into
AdobeDocs:mainfrom
oshmyheliuk:custom-fees

Conversation

@oshmyheliuk
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Purpose of this pull request

This pull request (PR) adds information and examples on how to add custom fees using a new webhook.
https://jira.corp.adobe.com/browse/CEXT-6229

Affected pages

Links to Magento Open Source code

  • ...

@@ -1,14 +1,14 @@
---
title: Totals collector development considerations
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why are we adding it here? Should it not go here? https://developer.adobe.com/commerce/extensibility/webhooks/use-cases/

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We already have this documentation for the Oope total collector module. So for me, it makes sense to new webhooks from that module to the same documentation.

The out-of-process totals collector exposes a dedicated webhook for custom fees:

```
plugin.magento.out_of_process_totals_collector.api.get_total_modifications.custom_fees
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this plugin available in ACCS?

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As a plugin, does it require di:compile in PaaS? If it's the case, please add the disclaimer

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's already available in ACCS. It requires webhook module generation after webhook subscription and di:compile after that as well.


To apply fees from an external service, register a webhook for the method `plugin.magento.out_of_process_totals_collector.api.get_total_modifications.custom_fees` (type `after`).

[PaaS Only](https://experienceleague.adobe.com/en/docs/commerce/user-guides/product-solutions) To register the webhook, [modify the `webhooks.xml` file](../../webhooks/hooks.md) (in your module or in `app/etc`):
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should have a central point that explains how to register webhooks, we have that information duplicated in many places. in other hand, should not be REST API & App Management the preferred registration mechanism for a webhook?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, the REST API & App Management should be preferred. But in Paas, we still have an unresolved issue: plugin-type webhooks must be in XML files to generate the required plugins during the build phase.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should have a central point that explains how to register webhooks, we have that information duplicated in many places

I believe the central point is in the webhooks documentation itself.

@github-project-automation github-project-automation Bot moved this from 📋 Needs Review to 👍 Approved in Commerce - Pull Requests Jun 4, 2026
Updated the documentation for the out-of-process totals collector webhook to clarify its functionality and usage.
@keharper keharper added internal Differentiates work between external and internal contributors new-topic A major update published as an entirely new document labels Jun 5, 2026
@AdobeDocs AdobeDocs deleted a comment from github-actions Bot Jun 5, 2026
@AdobeDocs AdobeDocs deleted a comment from github-actions Bot Jun 5, 2026
@AdobeDocs AdobeDocs deleted a comment from github-actions Bot Jun 5, 2026
@AdobeDocs AdobeDocs deleted a comment from github-actions Bot Jun 5, 2026
@AdobeDocs AdobeDocs deleted a comment from github-actions Bot Jun 5, 2026
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Jun 5, 2026

🔍 Linter Report

Click to expand full report
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
                     LINTER REPORT
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

Generated: 2026-06-05T21:42:43.270Z
Mode: Full Linting (all rules + dead links check)
Target Directory: /home/runner/work/commerce-extensibility/commerce-extensibility
Skipped Rules:
  - check-frontmatter → src/pages/_includes

───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Files to process: 212


═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
                        SUMMARY
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

  📁 Files processed:    212
  📄 Files with issues:  0
  ❌ Total errors:       0
  ⚠️  Total warnings:     0
  📋 Total issues:       0

Result: ✅ PASSED - All files passed linting successfully!

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

This comment was automatically generated by the linter bot.

@keharper keharper merged commit ef8025a into AdobeDocs:main Jun 5, 2026
6 checks passed
@github-project-automation github-project-automation Bot moved this from 👍 Approved to 🏁 Done in Commerce - Pull Requests Jun 5, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

internal Differentiates work between external and internal contributors new-topic A major update published as an entirely new document

Projects

Status: 🏁 Done

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants