I might be wrong that this is necessary, but don't we have to do another migration of all the refunds being created with wmf_civicrm_mark_refund?
Description
Description
| Status | Subtype | Assigned | Task | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Declined | None | T90630 Recurring Payments Reporting | |||
| Resolved | • mepps | T97372 Enable ability to look up contacts by phone number | |||
| Resolved | None | T77910 [epic] Upgrade Civi to 4.6 & integrate new reporting | |||
| Resolved | None | T116416 [Epic] Followup tasks after Civi 4.6 upgrade | |||
| Resolved | Eileenmcnaughton | T116317 [Epic] CiviCRM upgrade: Adapt refund processing & reporting to reflect changes since the upgrade. | |||
| Invalid | Eileenmcnaughton | T124983 [Epic] Repair historical refunds to be consistent with new style | |||
| Duplicate | Eileenmcnaughton | T124984 Clean up old-style refunds created since upgrade | |||
| Invalid | Eileenmcnaughton | T124981 [Epic] Rewrite automatic refund logic to perform a built-in Civi refund |
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
I think the task to remove the duplicate refunded status is enough - they will wind up with appropriate financial_trxn table entries... (we merged this into that job)