Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Only generate optimistic IOU report if no existing iouReportID #12759

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Dec 7, 2022

Conversation

amyevans
Copy link
Contributor

@amyevans amyevans commented Nov 16, 2022

cc @mountiny, @iwiznia, @Julesssss, @Gonals

Details

Reuse the existing iouReportID if we have one, instead of generating a new optimistic ID

Fixed Issues

$ #12432

Tests / QA

Test 1

  1. Open an existing chat with no IOUs and request money
  2. Cancel the request
  3. Create a second IOU request
  4. Verify there are no Report not found errors in the console

Test 2

  1. Request money via the green + with someone you've never chatted to before
  2. Cancel the request
  3. Create a second IOU request
  4. Verify there are no Report not found errors in the console
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests / QA

Repeat Tests 1 and 2 above while offline
Verify there are no Report not found errors in the console when you come back online

Note: there are other errors in the console, as well as replay effect when coming back online, but those are being addressed in other App issues

PR Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above

  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR

    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
    • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
    • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
    • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms

  • I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:

    • iOS / native
    • Android / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • Android / Chrome
    • MacOS / Chrome
    • MacOS / Desktop
  • I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)

  • I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)

    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product was added in all src/languages/* files
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers

  • I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines

  • I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)

  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)

  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such

  • If a new component is created I verified that:

    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:

    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(themeColors.componentBG)
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)

  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.

  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

PR Reviewer Checklist

The reviewer will copy/paste it into a new comment and complete it after the author checklist is completed

  • I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
  • I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
    • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
    • I verified the steps for expected offline behavior are in the Offline steps section
    • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
    • I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
    • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
  • I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • iOS / native
    • Android / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • Android / Chrome
    • MacOS / Chrome
    • MacOS / Desktop
  • If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
  • I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product was added in all src/languages/* files
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(themeColors.componentBG)
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots

Web

12759-web.mov

Mobile Web - Chrome

mweb-chrome.mov

Mobile Web - Safari

mweb-safari.mov

Desktop

desktop.mov

iOS

ios.mov

Android

android.mov

@amyevans amyevans changed the title Only generate optimistic IOU report if no existing iouReportID [Hold Web-E #35588] Only generate optimistic IOU report if no existing iouReportID Nov 16, 2022
@amyevans amyevans self-assigned this Nov 16, 2022
@amyevans amyevans requested a review from mountiny November 30, 2022 18:01
@amyevans amyevans marked this pull request as ready for review November 30, 2022 18:01
@amyevans amyevans requested a review from a team as a code owner November 30, 2022 18:01
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from mananjadhav and MariaHCD and removed request for a team November 30, 2022 18:02
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 30, 2022

@mananjadhav @MariaHCD One of you needs to copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

Julesssss
Julesssss previously approved these changes Dec 1, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@Julesssss Julesssss left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Approving, I have already tested this against the linked PR already 👍

Gonals
Gonals previously approved these changes Dec 1, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@Gonals Gonals left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is OFF HOLD now, right?

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

mountiny commented Dec 1, 2022

@Gonals The Web PR has been merged, but it is not in staging yet so this is not off hold and C+ cannot test yet.

This should be taken off hold once the Web PR is in production

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

mountiny commented Dec 1, 2022

So @mananjadhav FYI this is not ready to test yet, we will update ya when you can work on the checklist 🙇

src/libs/actions/IOU.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the update @mountiny

@amyevans amyevans dismissed stale reviews from Gonals and Julesssss via 53f5d7d December 1, 2022 18:45
Copy link
Contributor

@mountiny mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, I have tested locally for now with the main API, this is still not in staging so you cannot test yet @mananjadhav

@Gonals
Copy link
Contributor

Gonals commented Dec 2, 2022

Tests well locally!

@amyevans
Copy link
Contributor Author

amyevans commented Dec 5, 2022

The API change is now on staging, so you should be able to test now @mananjadhav!

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the update @amyevans. I'll get to the testing.

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

Reviewer Checklist

  • I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
  • I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
    • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
    • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
    • I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • iOS / native
    • Android / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • Android / Chrome
    • MacOS / Chrome
    • MacOS / Desktop
  • If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
  • I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product was added in all src/languages/* files
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(themeColors.componentBG)
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Web
web-iou-optimistic-reportid.mov
Mobile Web - Chrome
mweb-chrome-optimistic-reportid.mov
Mobile Web - Safari
mweb-safari-optimistic-reportid.mov
Desktop
desktop-iou-optimistic-reportid.mov
iOS
ios-iou-optimistic-reportid.mov
Android
android-optimistic-reportid.mov

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

@Gonals @mountiny @amyevans Reviewed and tests well. Screencasts attached with the completed checklist.

Copy link
Contributor

@Julesssss Julesssss left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Re-approving

@Julesssss
Copy link
Contributor

Just waiting for https://github.com/Expensify/Web-Expensify/pull/35588 to hit prod now.

@mountiny mountiny changed the title [Hold Web-E #35588] Only generate optimistic IOU report if no existing iouReportID Only generate optimistic IOU report if no existing iouReportID Dec 7, 2022
@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

mountiny commented Dec 7, 2022

Aaand just liek that https://github.com/Expensify/Web-Expensify/pull/35588 is in production now so merging! Great job!

@mountiny mountiny merged commit 699d469 into main Dec 7, 2022
@mountiny mountiny deleted the amy-onyx-error-requesting-money branch December 7, 2022 14:28
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Dec 7, 2022

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by @chiragsalian in version: 1.2.38-6 🚀

platform result
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants