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

Fix/18554: Update reaction dynamically in the reaction popup #18701

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
May 17, 2023

Conversation

dukenv0307
Copy link
Contributor

@dukenv0307 dukenv0307 commented May 10, 2023

Detail

We will move the logic to get information of the reaction to PopoverReactionList.js itself. So, this component could be dynamically updated

Fixed Issues

$ #18554
PROPOSAL: #18554 (comment)

Tests

  1. On device 1 and login with User A and go to chat with user B
  2. On device 2 and login with User B
  3. On device 1 send a message to user B and react to that message. Long press on that emoji to see the emoji reaction number and the user who reacted it (Do not close the popup )
  4. Now on device 2, from user B, react to the above message
  5. Verify that the emoji reaction number and the users who reacted to the message are dynamically updated on the popup on device 1
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

None

QA Steps

  1. On device 1 and login with User A and go to chat with user B
  2. On device 2 and login with User B
  3. On device 1 send a message to user B and react to that message. Long press on that emoji to see the emoji reaction number and the user who reacted it (Do not close the popup )
  4. Now on device 2, from user B, react to the above message
  5. Verify that the emoji reaction number and the users who reacted to the message are dynamically updated on the popup on device 1
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

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:
    • Android / native
    • Android / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • MacOS / Chrome / Safari
    • 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 the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • 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 is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is 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
  • I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
  • 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 any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • 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 code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • 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.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Web
Mobile Web - Chrome
Record_2023-05-10-16-22-58.mp4
Mobile Web - Safari && IOS
Screen-Recording-2023-05-10-at-16.42.53.mp4
Desktop
iOS

In the safari section

Android
18554.mp4

@dukenv0307 dukenv0307 marked this pull request as ready for review May 10, 2023 09:43
@dukenv0307 dukenv0307 requested a review from a team as a code owner May 10, 2023 09:43
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from cristipaval and rushatgabhane and removed request for a team May 10, 2023 09:43
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented May 10, 2023

@cristipaval @rushatgabhane 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]

@dukenv0307 dukenv0307 changed the title Fix/18554 Fix/18554: Update reaction dynamically in the reaction popup May 10, 2023
@rushatgabhane
Copy link
Member

@dukenv0307 kindly fix the merge conflicts

@dukenv0307
Copy link
Contributor Author

@rushatgabhane everything is updated

@rushatgabhane
Copy link
Member

@dukenv0307 can you sign the CLA please

@rushatgabhane
Copy link
Member

rushatgabhane commented May 10, 2023

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:
    • Android / native
    • Android / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • MacOS / Chrome / Safari
    • 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 the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • 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 is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is 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 any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • 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 code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • 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.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Web
Screen.Recording.2023-05-16.at.04.30.18.mov
Mobile Web - Chrome
Screen.Recording.2023-05-16.at.04.41.53.mov
Mobile Web - Safari
Screen.Recording.2023-05-16.at.04.42.17.mov
Desktop
Screen.Recording.2023-05-16.at.04.35.08.mov
iOS image
Android
Screen.Recording.2023-05-16.at.04.49.25.mov

@dukenv0307
Copy link
Contributor Author

@rushatgabhane Sorry about my late. I just updated, help to check again

@dukenv0307
Copy link
Contributor Author

@rushatgabhane Bump, please help to review

@strepanier03
Copy link
Contributor

@rushatgabhane - Little bump for the PR review here the next time you're online and available. Thanks!

@rushatgabhane
Copy link
Member

Reviewing today!

@rushatgabhane
Copy link
Member

rushatgabhane commented May 15, 2023

@dukenv0307 everything else looks good to me, nice work on the PR!

rushatgabhane
rushatgabhane previously approved these changes May 15, 2023
Copy link
Member

@rushatgabhane rushatgabhane left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@cristipaval LGTM!

rushatgabhane
rushatgabhane previously approved these changes May 16, 2023
@rushatgabhane
Copy link
Member

@dukenv0307 can you please merge with main and fix the lint errors

@rushatgabhane
Copy link
Member

rushatgabhane commented May 16, 2023

@dukenv0307 we still need to fix the lint errors - there's a prettier diff. Please push it!

Copy link
Member

@rushatgabhane rushatgabhane left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM! @cristipaval

@dukenv0307
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cristipaval Friendly bump

@cristipaval cristipaval merged commit a108f42 into Expensify:main May 17, 2023
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

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

Comment on lines +5 to +9
import lodashMap from 'lodash/map';
import lodashFilter from 'lodash/filter';
import lodashFind from 'lodash/find';
import lodashEach from 'lodash/each';
import lodashIsEqual from 'lodash/isEqual';
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Using underscore is our standard to keep everything consistent: https://github.com/Expensify/App/blob/main/contributingGuides/STYLE.md#object--array-methods

Please remove these and use underscore instead.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lodashGet is the only one we allow since underscore doesn't have an equivalent.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@tgolen @rushatgabhane I just created PR to fix: #19183

* @param {Array} users
* @return {string[]}
* */
const getUniqueEmojiCodes = (emoji, users) => {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

withOnyx({
reportActions: {
key: ({reportID}) => `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT_ACTIONS}${reportID}`,
canEvict: false,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why is this here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@rushatgabhane The PR is merged, so do we create a new PR to fix it or revert this PR?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what is wrong with it tho? @dukenv0307

and about other comments, you can create a new PR to address them and tag me for a review

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is an explanation about canEvict field
https://github.com/Expensify/react-native-onyx/blob/1d496b001f327c509131597faf260a81c002be77/lib/withOnyx.js#L113-L116
@tgolen @rushatgabhane I see that canEvict: false is added when we get reportAction everywhere in App repo. So I think in here we also add it for consistency

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh. But that's not a good reason.

When I initially reviewed this, this is how I reasoned it - When storage is full, don't remove reactions from storage. Which seems reasonable to me.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm pretty sure the eviction logic is completely broken, and I think this should just be removed, but maybe it should be there for report actions... I do see it used everywhere. @vitHoracek @marcaaron do you have any guidance on the canEvict setting for report actions?

Copy link
Member

@rushatgabhane rushatgabhane May 22, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

cc @mountiny some guidance on above please

we tagged the fake @vitHoracek

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

How did we deduce that the eviction logic was completely broken? Is there more context about that? I'm not aware of any issues with it, but perhaps it is broken.

The guidance on canEvict is that you should pass false if it's used for something that the UI depends on e.g. you don't want to evict report actions that are currently in view, but it is fine to remove them for a report that is not in view.

In reality, only report actions are evicted and when we set this up there weren't many places where we would disallow eviction other than the one place where we subscribed to a reportActions_<reportID> key that was needed for the active screen's UI (i.e. the chat screen).

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ok, I did some poking and all the places where it is being used look kosher to me. There is documented guidance here: https://github.com/expensify/app#storage-eviction

Open to improvements or suggestions. I think there's probably a better version of storage eviction waiting to be built at some point in all of our imaginations - but this one has gonna us pretty far. Let me know if there's anything else I can help with 🙇‍♂️

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@marcaaron The reason I believe that the eviction logic is broken is from this line here: https://github.com/Expensify/react-native-onyx/blob/main/lib/withOnyx.js#L129

When I was working with Thaibault (during ExpensiconX) and looking at migrating Onxy to TypeScript, we found that mapping.connectionID is undefined. This is because:

  • The connectionID gets saved to the mapping here in Onyx.connect()
  • We assume that the mapping there is a reference to the same mapping object that is in withOnyx but actually, it's a copy as we can see by the spread operator being used on mapping here when it is passed to Onyx.connect()
  • checkEvictableKeys() then looks through all the mappings in mapOnyxToState here and references mapping.connectionID. This is where it breaks 💥 because that object never had connectionID saved to it, the connectionID was only saved to a copy of it.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/cristipaval in version: 1.3.16-0 🚀

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

@dukenv0307 dukenv0307 mentioned this pull request May 18, 2023
55 tasks
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/chiragsalian in version: 1.3.16-7 🚀

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

2 similar comments
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/chiragsalian in version: 1.3.16-7 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/chiragsalian in version: 1.3.16-7 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/chiragsalian in version: 1.3.16-7 🚀

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

const emoji = lodashFind(emojis, (e) => e.name === selectedReaction.emoji);
const emojiCodes = getUniqueEmojiCodes(emoji, selectedReaction.users);
const hasUserReacted = Report.hasAccountIDReacted(this.props.currentUserPersonalDetails.accountID, reactionUsers);
const users = PersonalDetailsUtils.getPersonalDetailsByIDs(reactionUsers);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We missed to pass the accountID as the second param during this refractor causing this issue - #20267

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.

8 participants