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 crash app when opening split bill detail page by deep link #23977

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Aug 2, 2023

Conversation

dukenv0307
Copy link
Contributor

@dukenv0307 dukenv0307 commented Aug 1, 2023

Details

Fix crash app when opening split bill detail page by deep link

Fixed Issues

$ #23568
PROPOSAL: #23568 (comment)

Tests

  1. Login with any account
  2. Click on FAB > Split bill
  3. Enter any amount and choose some users to create split bill
  4. After the split bill is created, click on this to see split bill detail
  5. Copy the URL
  6. Sign out and sign in again with the URL above
  7. Verify that the app doesn't crash and split bill detail appears after loading is complete
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Need online to open the app by deep link

QA Steps

  1. Click on the text input to bring it into focus
  2. Upload an image via copy paste
  3. Verify a modal appears displaying a preview of that image
    --->
  4. Login with any account
  5. Click on FAB > Split bill
  6. Enter any amount and choose some users to create split bill
  7. After the split bill is created, click on this to see split bill detail
  8. Copy the URL
  9. Sign out and sign in again with the URL above
  10. Verify that the app doesn't crash and split bill detail appears after loading is complete
  • 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
    • If we are not using the full Onyx data that we loaded, I've added the proper selector in order to ensure the component only re-renders when the data it is using changes
    • 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

Note: For native, if we open by deep link before login app still go to LHN after login successfully. So in the video for IOS and Android, we open by deep link after login.

Web
Screen-Recording-2023-08-02-at-10.09.20.mp4
Mobile Web - Chrome
Record_2023-08-01-14-11-45.mp4
Mobile Web - Safari
Screen-Recording-2023-08-01-at-15.22.17.mp4
Desktop
Screen.Recording.2023-08-01.at.12.30.35.mp4
iOS
Screen-Recording-2023-08-01-at-14.22.23.mp4
Android
23568.mp4

@dukenv0307 dukenv0307 marked this pull request as ready for review August 1, 2023 05:37
@dukenv0307 dukenv0307 requested a review from a team as a code owner August 1, 2023 05:37
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team August 1, 2023 05:37
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Aug 1, 2023

@mananjadhav Please 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
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mananjadhav Friendly bump.

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

Reviewing this currently. Will finish this in a few hours.

forwardedRef: () => {},
reportActions: {},
report: {
isLoadingReportActions: true,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why do we need isLoadingReportingActions: true in default props? Why can't we have empty?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes I think we can remove this. I add this to verify that this will loading until the API is complete.


// eslint-disable-next-line rulesdir/no-negated-variables
function WithReportAndReportActionOrNotFound(props) {
// For small screen, we don't call openReport API when we go to a sub report page by deeplinnk
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'll have to verify this, can you confirm if this is documented somewhere?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we open a sub report link the app doesn't call openReport API in openReportByDeepLink function. And in small screen, we go to sidebar after login in. That is why it doesn't call openReport API in small screen after login.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I tested this in small screen without this and it display not found page.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do you think we should alway call openReport one time here if props.report is empty.


// eslint-disable-next-line rulesdir/no-negated-variables
function WithReportAndReportActionOrNotFound(props) {
// For small screen, we don't call openReport API when we go to a sub report page by deeplinnk
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
// For small screen, we don't call openReport API when we go to a sub report page by deeplinnk
// For small screen, we don't call openReport API when we go to a sub report page by deeplink

key: ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.POLICY,
},
reportActions: {
key: ({route}) => `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT_ACTIONS}${route.params.reportID}`,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Original code explicitly added toString(). Would this break something if we don't put toString?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think that fine because we wrap it in `` that is a string.


let reportAction = props.reportActions[`${props.route.params.reportActionID.toString()}`];
// Handle threads if needed
if (reportAction === undefined || reportAction.reportActionID === undefined) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this section can be moved to this own method?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It should be checked here to verify the reportAction is exist or not.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am fine, I am saying just move this block to it's own method?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do you mean we should create a method for this?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This whole block.

        let reportAction = props.reportActions[`${props.route.params.reportActionID.toString()}`];
        // Handle threads if needed
        if (reportAction === undefined || reportAction.reportActionID === undefined) {
            reportAction = ReportActionsUtils.getParentReportAction(props.report);
        }

}
}, [props.isSmallScreenWidth, props.route.params.reportID]);

const isLoadingReport = props.isLoadingReportData && (_.isEmpty(props.report) || !props.report.reportID);
Copy link
Collaborator

@mananjadhav mananjadhav Aug 2, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I understand these checks are complex, but we generally try to early return. Is it possible to structure the code:

// Perform all the loading checks
 const isLoadingReport  = ...;
 const isLoadingReportAction = ....;

 if ((isLoadingReport || isLoadingReportAction) && !shouldHideReport) {
    return <FullscreenLoadingIndicator />;
}


// Perform the access/not found checks
const shouldHideReport
if (shouldHideReport || _.isEmpty(reportAction)) {
    return <NotFoundPage />;
}

if ((isLoadingReport || isLoadingReportAction) && !shouldHideReport) {
return <FullscreenLoadingIndicator />;
}
if (shouldHideReport || _.isEmpty(reportAction)) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please check my comment above and then I feel shouldHideReport won't be needed, the conditions can be put here inline.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I will check and re-test again.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Some reports contain data but we can not access this report by ReportUtils.canAccessReport fucntion, so this check is necessary to display not found page.

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

@dukenv0307 I've left some comments, I'll be available to review in another 2-3 hours.

@dukenv0307
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mananjadhav Updated for all recommendations above.

}
Report.openReport(props.route.params.reportID);
// eslint-disable-next-line react-hooks/exhaustive-deps
}, []);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why would we not want to depend on the props.isSmallScreenWdith and props.report ?

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

mananjadhav commented Aug 2, 2023

@dukenv0307 1-2 comments and the rest of it looks good.

// Perform all the loading checks
const isLoadingReport = props.isLoadingReportData && (_.isEmpty(props.report) || !props.report.reportID);
const isLoadingReportAction = _.isEmpty(props.reportActions) || (props.report.isLoadingReportActions && _.isEmpty(getReportAction()));
const shouldHideReport = !isLoadingReport && (_.isEmpty(props.report) || !props.report.reportID || !ReportUtils.canAccessReport(props.report, props.policies, props.betas));
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Possible to move this check after the return <FullScreenLoadingIndicator>?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

testing again if it's possible

const isLoadingReportAction = _.isEmpty(props.reportActions) || (props.report.isLoadingReportActions && _.isEmpty(getReportAction()));
const shouldHideReport = !isLoadingReport && (_.isEmpty(props.report) || !props.report.reportID || !ReportUtils.canAccessReport(props.report, props.policies, props.betas));

if ((isLoadingReport || isLoadingReportAction) && !shouldHideReport) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Inline with the above comment, anyway to remove !shouldHideReport from here so that the flag is only initialized after this block?

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 check is necessary here. if reportID is not found props.reportAction is true and isLoadingReportAction is true, so we need shouldHideReport here to return false if the report doesn't exist.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Okay thanks.

}
Report.openReport(props.route.params.reportID);
// eslint-disable-next-line react-hooks/exhaustive-deps
}, []);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We're only left with this now @dukenv0307? Do we need to disable the exhaustive-deps check? Why not add the props.isSmallScreenWidth, props.report, props.route.params.reportID to the dependencies?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we only need to call this API one time here.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Are we sure?

  1. What happens when we're on Desktop/Web and resize the browser? and then perform the steps?
  2. Assume that we've got more than one Split bill requests URL shared on chat, and we click on both one after the other?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Cool will add dependence again.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hey,
Sorry I should've been clear. I am not saying always need to add the dependencies. I wanted to know if it is required? If not, then we add a comment why certain properties are not required.

For example,

  • I feel isSmallScreenWidth is required
  • I am not confident about props.report?
  • and I am pretty sure we don't need route.params.reportID as that would mean opening a new URL, which should probably reload the whole component, thereby calling useEffect

Please correct me if I my understanding is wrong? May be you could test at your end?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

isSmallScreenWidth and route.param.reportID will be fine because inn native if we already open a split bill and we open other by deeplink maybe this component will not unmount.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@mananjadhav updated, help to check again.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

thanks @dukenv0307. I'll test this in an hour.

Copy link
Collaborator

@mananjadhav mananjadhav left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for addressing the changes. I am now testing this.

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from Li357 August 2, 2023 16:03
@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

mananjadhav commented Aug 2, 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
web-split-bill-crash.mov
Mobile Web - Chrome
mweb-chrome-split-bill-crash.mov
Mobile Web - Safari
mweb-safari-split-bill-crash.mov
Desktop
desktop-split-bill-crash.mov
iOS
ios-split-bill-crash.mov
Android
android-split-bill-crash.mov

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

@dukenv0307 This isn't working for me. I thought it was an issue with my account, so I created a new account. It just keeps loading.

const isLoadingReportAction = _.isEmpty(props.reportActions) || (props.report.isLoadingReportActions && _.isEmpty(getReportAction()));

This is always true for me.

web-report-actions-not-loading.mov

@dukenv0307
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mananjadhav You can see the report screen the report doesn't loading completely

@dukenv0307
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mananjadhav Can you run npm install and test again?

@dukenv0307
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mananjadhav Can you check again, I tested and it works as well. In the video above, because the ReportScreen loading infinitely, SplitBillDetailPage also loading.

Screencast.from.03-08-2023.00.26.09.webm

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

@dukenv0307 There was an issue with the Expensify servers. I thought it was because of the PR, because it loaded on main. Anyway this worked fine on Web, now testing on other platforms.

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the patience here @dukenv0307. This tests well. I can we don't link the URLs on native, which exists on the main too.

@Li357 All yours.

Copy link
Contributor

@Li357 Li357 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM! Thanks y'all for getting this out!

@Li357 Li357 merged commit cf4e837 into Expensify:main Aug 2, 2023
11 of 15 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Aug 2, 2023

✋ 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

OSBotify commented Aug 3, 2023

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/Li357 in version: 1.3.50-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Aug 7, 2023

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 1.3.50-3 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Aug 7, 2023

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/Li357 in version: 1.3.51-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Aug 9, 2023

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 1.3.51-2 🚀

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.

4 participants