@mohasinac/appkit 4.41.12 → 4.41.13

package/dist/features/admin/components/AdminOrdersView.js

@@ -141,9 +141,35 @@ export function AdminOrdersView({ children, ...props }) {
                     ? `${title}${extraCount > 0 ? ` +${extraCount} more` : ""}`
                     : `Order ${orderId}`,
                 secondary: [
-                    toStringValue(item.buyerName ?? item.customerName, "Unknown buyer"),
-                    toCurrency(item.totalAmount ?? item.total ?? item.amount),
-                    orderId.slice(0, 14),
+                    /*
+                     * 🛑 `userName` and `totalPrice` FIRST — they are the document's
+                     * real field names (OrderDocument, and the live response of
+                     * GET /api/admin/orders).
+                     *
+                     * This read `buyerName ?? customerName` and
+                     * `totalAmount ?? total ?? amount`: five names, not one of which
+                     * the order document has ever carried. So every row rendered
+                     * "Unknown buyer · -", on all 25 rows, for as long as the view has
+                     * existed — and the `??` chains made it look like considered
+                     * defensive coding rather than a guess. A fallback spelled three
+                     * ways is the tell that nobody checked which one was real.
+                     *
+                     * The aliases are GONE rather than demoted to fallbacks: nothing
+                     * declares them (the client `Order` type has no such fields) and
+                     * nothing emits them (no adapter renames to them). Keeping a
+                     * fallback with no producer only preserves the ambiguity that
+                     * hid the bug.
+                     */
+                    toStringValue(item.userName, "Unknown buyer"),
+                    toCurrency(item.totalPrice),
+                    /*
+                     * Not `.slice(0, 14)` — that cut mid-date, so
+                     * `order-1-20260822-aucwon` and `order-1-20260821-prizedr` both
+                     * rendered as "order-1-202608". A truncation that destroys
+                     * uniqueness is worse than a long string, because the id is the
+                     * one thing on the row an admin searches by.
+                     */
+                    orderId,
                     paymentReviewLabel(item),
                 ]
                     .filter(Boolean)

package/dist/features/seller/components/SellerOrdersView.js

@@ -366,13 +366,37 @@ export function SellerOrdersView({ orderDetailApiBase = SELLER_ENDPOINTS.ORDERS,
             const loc = item.physicalLocation;
             return {
                 id: toStringValue(item.id, `order-${index}`),
-                primary: `Order ${toStringValue(item.id, "-").slice(0, 14)}`,
-                secondary: toStringValue(item.buyerName ?? item.buyerDisplayName, "Unknown buyer"),
+                /*
+                 * 🛑 The row says WHAT WAS SOLD, not the id repeated.
+                 *
+                 * This was `Order ${id.slice(0, 14)}` — a raw id, truncated
+                 * mid-date, so two different orders rendered identically. The title
+                 * was available the whole time: `items[0].productTitle` is
+                 * denormalised onto every order precisely so a list never needs a
+                 * second fetch (Root Cause #52), and it is already read three lines
+                 * below as `itemTitle`.
+                 */
+                primary: (() => {
+                    const title = typeof firstItem.productTitle === "string" ? firstItem.productTitle : "";
+                    if (!title)
+                        return `Order ${toStringValue(item.id, "-")}`;
+                    const extra = itemsArr.length - 1;
+                    return extra > 0 ? `${title} +${extra} more` : title;
+                })(),
+                /*
+                 * `userName` / `totalPrice` are the document's real field names.
+                 * `buyerName`/`buyerDisplayName`/`totalAmount`/`total` are four
+                 * spellings the order document has never carried, so every seller's
+                 * order list showed "Unknown buyer" and ₹0 — see AdminOrdersView for
+                 * the full writeup. They are removed rather than demoted: nothing
+                 * declares them and nothing emits them.
+                 */
+                secondary: toStringValue(item.userName, "Unknown buyer"),
                 status: toStringValue(item.status, "PENDING"),
                 updatedAt: toRelativeDate(item.updatedAt ?? item.orderDate ?? item.createdAt),
                 itemCount: itemsArr.length,
-                totalAmount: Number(item.totalAmount ?? item.total ?? 0),
-                buyerName: toStringValue(item.buyerName ?? item.buyerDisplayName, "Unknown buyer"),
+                totalAmount: Number(item.totalPrice ?? 0),
+                buyerName: toStringValue(item.userName, "Unknown buyer"),
                 itemImage: typeof firstItem.image === "string" ? firstItem.image : undefined,
                 itemTitle: typeof firstItem.productTitle === "string" ? firstItem.productTitle : undefined,
                 physicalLocation: loc && typeof loc.zone === "string"

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@mohasinac/appkit",
-  "version": "4.41.12",
+  "version": "4.41.13",
   "license": "MIT",
   "publishConfig": {
     "access": "public"