[3.0] Support CardHolderName/CardHolder

[judgej]

Most gateways now distinguish between the billing name and the card holder name. This is useful when, for example, a person is being billed but is using a company credit card - the names will be different.

The CreditCard class does not explicitly provide a named field for the card holder name. For the sake of standardisation and setting a convention that all the drivers can use, I believe it needs a card holder name parameter, whatever it is called.

The card holder name could fall back to the billing name if it is not explicitly set, so this would provide some backwards compatibility.

Any thoughts on that? Good idea? Perhaps I'm overlooking something?

[barryvdh]

I guess so. I would also prefer to remove the Customer object from the CreditCard object entirely.

[judgej]

Yes, I'd be behind that. The credit card is just one of a range of payment methods.

Gateways support many other methods, all with different collections of data to define them: previous transactions, saved card references (with or without a CVV grabbed from the user last-minute for extra security), short-lived tokenised cards (with front-end AJAX tokenisation), direct debit mandate, bank accounts, PayPal tokens etc. The credit card payment method is not special - it only needs half a dozen pieces of data to define an entered credit card. All the other customer details just came along for the ride when OmniPay was a fresh young thing.

[judgej]

It was this ticket that prompted this: thephpleague/omnipay-sagepay#81