Set default destinations for Google products submission

[nima-karimi]

Changes proposed in this Pull Request:

Closes #215.

This PR sets the included_destination field to a set of default constant values for all products: Shopping ads and Free listings.

Question: I got a validation error from Google while submitting these two destinations. It's probably because I don't have the Shopping ads destination set in my product feed. But I can't set it anyways because there's no option but Free listings there. Not sure what configuration should I make to include that destination.

Detailed test instructions:

1. Sync all products or one product from the Connection Test page
2. Check your Merchant Center after a few minutes and open the newly submitted product
3. Check under the "Raw feed attributes" and make sure that both destinations are included

[jconroy]

Thanks @nima-karimi

I got a validation error from Google while submitting these two destinations.

What was the error?

[nima-karimi]

What was the error?

It says to "Use a valid destination" 🤔

[mikkamp]

Question: I got a validation error from Google while submitting these two destinations. It's probably because I don't have the Shopping ads destination set in my product feed. But I can't set it anyways because there's no option but Free listings there. Not sure what configuration should I make to include that destination.

You would need to create/link an ads account to your merchant account for that to start showing up. I have them both showing up:

Although since this is setup for the product feed as a whole, I don't think it makes sense for us to set it per product. At least not in v1 where we include all products as free listings, and all products for a campaign (once they linked an ad account). If you are setting it per product then you would need to check if the user setup an ads account (which comes after syncing products in the onboarding process).

As far as I can see included_destination is optional and is combined with excluded_destination, so if that's set once per feed then wouldn't that be sufficient for our use case? Why is it necessary to set it to a set of defaults per product (some users might not setup an ad account till a lot later)?

[jconroy]

set once per feed then wouldn't that be sufficient for our use case?

I'm not sure it is set once per feed. When we first push a product to the MC via the content API a "Content API" feed is created automatically.

Why is it necessary to set it to a set of defaults per product (some users might not setup an ad account till a lot later)?

This may be me miss interpreting a conversation...

The Merchant Center product feed has an attribute “included_destination”. I have pasted the documentation specific to the correct values and API docs below, e.g. Shopping ads and Free listings. Additionally, there are Account level Shipping settings that have destinations. We suggest eligibility of “All scenarios except Shopping Actions”.

Perhaps we should be making sure to set eligibility within #255

[jconroy]

@JamesAntisdel @Kheiden wanted to pull y'all into the convo - seems we've still got a little confusion about the appropriate approach for setting destinations.

Should we...

• not worry about setting the "included_destinations"
• make sure we set eligibility on the shipping services we add?

Or be doing something else?

[JamesAntisdel]

I will need to confirm with @Kheiden but I think this may be optional for the products, i.e. you could leave it off for now to unblock. That said, I did test and got the following object to work for "included_destination" if you want to try.

"includedDestinations": [
"Shopping",
"Free Listings"
]

[JamesAntisdel]

Also, if it helps, the object returns afterward like this:

"includedDestinations": [
"Shopping",
"SurfacesAcrossGoogle"
]

[jconroy]

Thanks @JamesAntisdel - interesting I think docs we've seen have it listed as "Shopping Ads" - we can try with just "Shopping" as the value but if we can leave off then I guess we run with that.

optional for the products,

It is listed as optional but I think we were wanting to make sure we have the ones we want covered to make sure

[jconroy]

I'll close this for now until we see it actually becoming an issue (the property is optional)