Release 2.0.0

[armando-rodriguez-cko]

• The merchant-specific subdomain (with_environment_subdomain) is now required. Set it, or call the deprecated with_legacy_domain to keep using the shared checkout.com hosts (feat: require with_environment_subdomain or an explicit with_legacy_domain opt-out #193)
• An invalid subdomain now raises instead of being silently ignored (feat: require with_environment_subdomain or an explicit with_legacy_domain opt-out #193)
• Add optional amount to VoidRequest to support partial voids (feat(payments): add optional amount to VoidRequest for partial voids #196)
• Add the ISV (SaaS seller) payout schedule fields balance_minimum, carry_forward_enabled and payment_instrument_id (feat(accounts): add ISV payout schedule fields and payment_instrument_id #197)

[agent-wall-e]

🟡 Risk Classification: MINOR

Approval route: AI Review + Human Approval
Rollback controls: Staged rollout + rollback

Classification reasons

• no_low_class_matched
• prod_source_modified

Operational gates

• ✅ jira_ticket
• ✅ independent_review

Files analysed: 1

---

_{wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · policy 376219bc71e6…}

[agent-wall-e]

🔬 Debug — why this classification?

Each reason code emitted by the classifier, its source clause in the AI in SDLC Control Framework, and what it means.

Reason code	Kind	Clause	Meaning
no_low_class_matched	informational	§2.2 (fall-through)	None of the deterministic Low classes (§2.2.3, §2.2.4, §2.2.7, docs-only) applied; classifier fell through to LLM evaluation.
prod_source_modified	informational	§2.1 M7 (informational)	At least one file is non-doc, non-test, non-IaC — i.e. application source code was modified.

Kinds:

• classifying — this rule contributed to the chosen tier.
• informational — context only; did not by itself decide the tier.

See issue #3 for the proposal to formalise this map as Appendix A of the standards doc.

_{wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · debug}

[agent-wall-e]

🔵 Advisory review: Sound, but needs your judgement

This PR needs a human approval. The code itself reads as correct; whether it should land depends on context I don't have.

This diff only bumps the version constant from 1.12.0 to 2.0.0; the actual feature changes described in the PR body (subdomain enforcement, VoidRequest amount, ISV payout fields) are not visible in this diff, so correctness of the full release cannot be assessed from what's shown.

For you to decide

• The diff is partial — only version.rb is included, so none of the claimed breaking changes (with_environment_subdomain required, invalid subdomain raises, VoidRequest amount, ISV payout schedule fields) can be verified against the diff.
• A major version bump to 2.0.0 implies a breaking change contract for consumers; a human reviewer should confirm the CHANGELOG or release notes accurately reflect all breaking changes before approving.
• The version string '2.0.0' should match whatever tag/release is being cut — confirm no intermediate 1.x tags were skipped or will conflict.

---

_{This is not an approval. wall-e cannot auto-approve this PR — it is an opinion to help whoever does. Advisory review · us.anthropic.claude-sonnet-4-6 · wall-e 2026.06.19-02}

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud