[HOLD] Feat: Update how GBR is determined for IOU/expense reports #29778

waterim · 2023-10-17T14:19:25Z

Details

This PR is to add tests to IOUTests.js file for submitReport function

Fixed Issues

$ #29595

Tests

N/A

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as tests

QA Steps

N/A

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.

Behaviour is the same for all platforms, attaching screenshots for focused and most recent for IOU green dot

Web

Most recent:

Focus:

puneetlath · 2023-10-19T15:09:41Z

src/components/LHNOptionsList/OptionRowLHN.js

@@ -116,8 +116,7 @@ function OptionRowLHN(props) {

    const hasBrickError = optionItem.brickRoadIndicator === CONST.BRICK_ROAD_INDICATOR_STATUS.ERROR;
    const defaultSubscriptSize = optionItem.isExpenseRequest ? CONST.AVATAR_SIZE.SMALL_NORMAL : CONST.AVATAR_SIZE.DEFAULT;
-    const shouldShowGreenDotIndicator =
-        !hasBrickError && (optionItem.isUnreadWithMention || optionItem.isWaitingForTaskCompleteFromAssignee || ReportUtils.isWaitingForIOUActionFromCurrentUser(optionItem));
+    const shouldShowGreenDotIndicator = !hasBrickError && (optionItem.isUnreadWithMention || optionItem.isWaitingForTaskCompleteFromAssignee || ReportUtils.shouldShowGBR(optionItem));


Maybe it would be cleaner if we move isUnreadWithMention and isWaitingForTaskCompleteFromAssignee into the shouldShowGBR function. So all the logic of when to show GBR is in there.

…BR-is-determined

melvin-bot · 2023-10-24T00:45:14Z

@akinwale 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]

akinwale · 2023-10-24T03:12:22Z

tests/unit/SidebarOrderTest.js

@@ -431,7 +430,7 @@ describe('Sidebar', () => {
                        expect(screen.queryAllByTestId('Pin Icon')).toHaveLength(1);
                        expect(screen.queryAllByTestId('Pencil Icon')).toHaveLength(1);
                        expect(lodashGet(displayNames, [0, 'props', 'children'])).toBe('One, Two');
-                        expect(lodashGet(displayNames, [1, 'props', 'children'])).toBe('Email Two owes $100.00');
+                        expect(lodashGet(displayNames, [1, 'props', 'children'])).toBe('Email Two paid $100.00');


Why does this change from owes to paid if all we're doing in this PR is determining whether or not the GBR should be displayed?

I was thinking about the same thing, but tests were failing, because they were receiving this

Probably more places where “ hasOutstandingIOU” was doing something
Cc: @puneetlath

Yeah, I assumed tests failing meant something probably broke in the logic. 😅

Will wait for input from @puneetlath.

@akinwale updated, changed to previous, hasOutstandingIOU was needed for a correct behaviour

It looks like this change is no longer in the code? I didn't see it when reviewing.

src/libs/ReportUtils.js

puneetlath · 2023-10-24T19:35:15Z

src/libs/SidebarUtils.js

@@ -179,7 +179,7 @@ function getOrderedReportIDs(currentReportId, allReportsDict, betas, policies, p
    reportsToDisplay.forEach((report) => {
        if (report.isPinned) {
            pinnedReports.push(report);
-        } else if (ReportUtils.isWaitingForIOUActionFromCurrentUser(report)) {
+        } else if (ReportUtils.shouldShowGBR(report)) {


Instead of having a separate section for outstandingIOUReports. Can we just include this in the pinned reports group?

This will cause multiple changes in tests, but sure, will do that

If you prefer to handle it in a separate PR that is also fine.

Does it make sense to have it sorted together?
I mean we always want to have pinned and just after green dots

I think we'd just do if (report.isPinned || ReportUtils.shouldShowGBR(report)) pinnedReports.push(report);

But what if green dot report will be before the pinned report, is it a correct behavior?

Yep that's fine. We want them to be treated the same from an ordering perspective.

Updated and updated few tests as it doesnt sort IOU reports and pinned and IOU reports have the same order priority

src/types/onyx/Report.ts

puneetlath · 2023-10-24T19:38:30Z

@waterim are you sure this is working in #focus mode? I tried testing it with an account that had hasOutstandingChildRequest set on some reports and then switching to focus mode and the reports didn't show up in the LHN.

waterim · 2023-10-24T19:40:09Z

@waterim are you sure this is working in #focus mode? I tried testing it with an account that had hasOutstandingChildRequest set on some reports and then switching to focus mode and the reports didn't show up in the LHN.

Will test it once again, was working, but maybe was testing in a wrong way

…BR-is-determined

waterim · 2023-10-27T00:45:01Z

@puneetlath Fixed the issue and resolved conflicts!

puneetlath · 2023-10-27T12:22:09Z

src/libs/ReportUtils.js

-        // Current user is an admin and the report has been approved but not settled yet
-        return policy.role === CONST.POLICY.ROLE.ADMIN && isReportApproved(report);
+    if (report.isWaitingForTaskCompleteFromAssignee) {
+        return true;
    }

    // Money request waiting for current user to add their credit bank account


@waterim actually, we've decided to treat this condition like the others. If a report is waiting on bank account, we will add the hasOutstandingChildRequest to the parent for the submitter and show the green dot on the parent. So let's remove this condition.

@waterim I think we should remove this whole block:

// Money request waiting for current user to add their credit bank account // hasOutstandingIOU will be false if the user paid, but isWaitingOnBankAccount will be true if user don't have a wallet or bank account setup if (!report.hasOutstandingIOU && report.isWaitingOnBankAccount && report.ownerAccountID === currentUserAccountID) { return true; }

src/libs/ReportUtils.js

src/types/onyx/Report.ts

…BR-is-determined

waterim · 2023-10-30T18:57:42Z

@puneetlath Resolved conflicts once again, second time for the last 3 hours :D

puneetlath · 2023-10-30T19:51:14Z

@waterim you have a conflict.

@akinwale can you re-test? We've deployed the back-end changes for setting the hasOutstandingChildRequest field properly when returning the chats upon login in both most recent mode and focus mode. So it should be possible to test both of those now.

waterim · 2023-10-30T20:00:43Z

@puneetlath no conflicts, please try to refresh the page

akinwale · 2023-10-31T19:22:30Z

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: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- iOS: mWeb 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 the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
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

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

akinwale

LGTM.

Tests well.

puneetlath · 2023-10-31T19:20:07Z

src/libs/ReportUtils.js

-        // Current user is an admin and the report has been approved but not settled yet
-        return policy.role === CONST.POLICY.ROLE.ADMIN && isReportApproved(report);
+    if (report.isWaitingForTaskCompleteFromAssignee) {
+        return true;
    }

    // Money request waiting for current user to add their credit bank account


@waterim I think we should remove this whole block:

// Money request waiting for current user to add their credit bank account // hasOutstandingIOU will be false if the user paid, but isWaitingOnBankAccount will be true if user don't have a wallet or bank account setup if (!report.hasOutstandingIOU && report.isWaitingOnBankAccount && report.ownerAccountID === currentUserAccountID) { return true; }

puneetlath · 2023-10-31T19:21:38Z

src/libs/ReportUtils.js

- * Determines if a report has an IOU that is waiting for an action from the current user (either Pay or Add a credit bank account)
+ * Determines if a report should show a GBR (green dot) in the LHN. This can happen when the report: 
+    - is unread and the user was mentioned in one of the unread comments
+    - is for an outstanding task waiting on the user


I don't see the task case covered in the function. Shouldn't it be?

puneetlath · 2023-10-31T19:22:58Z

src/libs/SidebarUtils.ts

    const draftReports: Report[] = [];
    const nonArchivedReports: Report[] = [];
    const archivedReports: Report[] = [];
    reportsToDisplay.forEach((report) => {
-        if (report.isPinned) {
+        if (report.isPinned ?? ReportUtils.shouldShowGBR(report)) {


Why ?? instead of ||?

New lint rules

puneetlath · 2023-11-01T00:14:08Z

@waterim I pushed some commits to try to get it merged today. I hope you don't mind!

waterim · 2023-11-01T00:15:35Z

@puneetlath ah, sure, no problem, sorry for a late answer, thats a Halloween night and was not near to computer during the evening

puneetlath · 2023-11-01T00:27:54Z

All good! We got it across the finish line 🙌🏾

add hasOutstandingChildRequest verification

cb3f3d0

waterim changed the title ~~Feat: Update how GBR is determined for IOU/expense reports~~ [HOLD] Feat: Update how GBR is determined for IOU/expense reports Oct 18, 2023

adjusted and removed unused parts

ddba0ec

puneetlath reviewed Oct 19, 2023

View reviewed changes

waterim added 4 commits October 20, 2023 14:13

clean up show GBR

4fca049

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into feat-29595-Update-G…

7523bd6

…BR-is-determined

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into feat-29595-Update-G…

b8b6752

…BR-is-determined

tests

f6b79e6

waterim marked this pull request as ready for review October 24, 2023 00:45

waterim requested a review from a team as a code owner October 24, 2023 00:45

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team October 24, 2023 00:45

melvin-bot bot requested a review from akinwale October 24, 2023 00:45

fix lint

f4cb009

akinwale reviewed Oct 24, 2023

View reviewed changes

tests fix

63f6bd8

mountiny assigned waterim Oct 24, 2023

puneetlath requested changes Oct 24, 2023

View reviewed changes

waterim added 3 commits October 25, 2023 20:01

updated text

647efb8

fix GBR display

de9e121

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into feat-29595-Update-G…

2bb9228

…BR-is-determined

puneetlath reviewed Oct 27, 2023

View reviewed changes

puneetlath requested changes Oct 27, 2023

View reviewed changes

src/libs/ReportUtils.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/types/onyx/Report.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

waterim added 4 commits October 27, 2023 15:47

changes

bfb06ae

remove iou ordering

a9c9ef2

lint fix

0ce0891

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into feat-29595-Update-G…

dd4a7bb

…BR-is-determined

akinwale approved these changes Oct 31, 2023

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from puneetlath October 31, 2023 19:23

puneetlath requested changes Oct 31, 2023

View reviewed changes

puneetlath mentioned this pull request Oct 31, 2023

Feat: Update how GBR is determined for IOU/expense reports #30655

Merged

58 tasks

puneetlath merged commit dd4a7bb into Expensify:main Oct 31, 2023
16 of 17 checks passed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[HOLD] Feat: Update how GBR is determined for IOU/expense reports #29778

[HOLD] Feat: Update how GBR is determined for IOU/expense reports #29778

waterim commented Oct 17, 2023 •

edited

Loading

puneetlath Oct 19, 2023

melvin-bot bot commented Oct 24, 2023

akinwale Oct 24, 2023

waterim Oct 24, 2023

waterim Oct 24, 2023

akinwale Oct 24, 2023 •

edited

Loading

waterim Oct 24, 2023

puneetlath Oct 24, 2023

puneetlath Oct 24, 2023

waterim Oct 24, 2023

puneetlath Oct 24, 2023

waterim Oct 27, 2023

puneetlath Oct 27, 2023

waterim Oct 27, 2023

puneetlath Oct 27, 2023

puneetlath Oct 27, 2023

waterim Oct 30, 2023

puneetlath commented Oct 24, 2023

waterim commented Oct 24, 2023

waterim commented Oct 27, 2023

puneetlath Oct 27, 2023

puneetlath Oct 31, 2023

waterim commented Oct 30, 2023

puneetlath commented Oct 30, 2023

waterim commented Oct 30, 2023

akinwale commented Oct 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading

akinwale left a comment

puneetlath Oct 31, 2023

puneetlath Oct 31, 2023

puneetlath Oct 31, 2023

waterim Nov 1, 2023

puneetlath commented Nov 1, 2023

waterim commented Nov 1, 2023

puneetlath commented Nov 1, 2023

[HOLD] Feat: Update how GBR is determined for IOU/expense reports #29778

[HOLD] Feat: Update how GBR is determined for IOU/expense reports #29778

Conversation

waterim commented Oct 17, 2023 • edited Loading

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

melvin-bot bot commented Oct 24, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

akinwale Oct 24, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

puneetlath commented Oct 24, 2023

waterim commented Oct 24, 2023

waterim commented Oct 27, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

waterim commented Oct 30, 2023

puneetlath commented Oct 30, 2023

waterim commented Oct 30, 2023

akinwale commented Oct 31, 2023 • edited Loading

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

akinwale left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

puneetlath commented Nov 1, 2023

waterim commented Nov 1, 2023

puneetlath commented Nov 1, 2023

waterim commented Oct 17, 2023 •

edited

Loading

akinwale Oct 24, 2023 •

edited

Loading

akinwale commented Oct 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading