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

Disable logs for staging and production native apps #30875

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 7, 2023

Conversation

kidroca
Copy link
Contributor

@kidroca kidroca commented Nov 3, 2023

Details

  1. Enhanced logging to print environment and build details for better insights.
  2. Removed the logic that disables console logging for production webpack builds.
  3. Implemented logic to disable console logging for native production builds, excluding error and warn logs.
  4. Simplified the configuration structure for webpack presets and plugins.

Fixed Issues

$ #30571
PROPOSAL: #30571 (comment)

Tests

For Mobile Native Apps (Android/iOS):

  1. Setup:
    • Start the local environment:
      • Android: npm run android
      • iOS: npm run ios
    • Ensure DEV mode is activated:
      1. Access the dev menu by pressing D in the terminal running the metro server.
      2. Navigate to Settings in the dev menu and ensure "JS DEV Mode" is checked.
  2. Observe Debug Logs:
    • Conduct any action (e.g., opening a report). The terminal running the metro server should display extensive debug information.
  3. Test Non-DEV Mode:
    • Deactivate DEV mode and refresh the app by pressing r in the terminal running the metro server.
    • In this state, the JS code is bundled for production and will not display logs. For instance, opening a report won't produce Onyx debug details.

For Web / mWeb / Desktop:

  1. Local Environment Check:
    • For verification:
      • Web: Run npm run web
      • Desktop: Run npm run desktop
    • Access browser developer tools (typically F12).
    • Open a report and verify that debug logs are appearing in the console.
  2. Production Builds Check:
    • Execute npm run build and review the generated output in the dist directory.
      1. Access dist/main-{hash}.js. Searching for console.debug should yield more than 30 matches.
    • As an alternative, either:
      • Build and initiate the desktop app, OR
      • Launch a local server showcasing the production website. Examine the browser developer tools as described in the first point.

Backend check

Ensure logs are still being sent to the backend.

  1. Monitor Network Activity:

    • Watch the device's network activity for requests directed at: https://www.expensify.com/api?command=Log.
  2. Backend Logs Verification (For Authorized Personnel):

    • If you have access rights to the backend logs, verify the logs directly on the backend.

Offline tests

N/A: The changes are exclusive to the build process.

QA Steps

  • Examine any noticeable performance enhancements on iOS or Android platforms.

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: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb 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 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 author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Dev with debug logs

Android - dev with debug logs

Prod no debug logs

Android - prod no debug logs

Android: mWeb Chrome

image

iOS: Native image
iOS: mWeb Safari image
MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Web

MacOS: Desktop image

Comment on lines +102 to +107
module.exports = (api) => {
console.debug('babel.config.js');
console.debug(' - api.version:', api.version);
console.debug(' - api.env:', api.env());
console.debug(' - process.env.NODE_ENV:', process.env.NODE_ENV);
console.debug(' - process.env.BABEL_ENV:', process.env.BABEL_ENV);
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've included these logs, because I've found out that when we're building the production web release, the environment output is development, which is why the webpack configuration above never used the env.production path

Comment on lines -20 to +21
env: {
production: {
presets: defaultPresets,
plugins: [...defaultPlugins, 'transform-remove-console'],
},
development: {
presets: defaultPresets,
plugins: defaultPlugins,
},
},
presets: defaultPresets,
plugins: defaultPlugins,
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  • The env.production path were never engaged for web builds. The reason being, NODE_ENV isn't defined before initiating the build process.
  • I'm omitting the 'transform-remove-console' plugin. Our intent is to retain console logs for web/desktop in production builds.

In essence, this modification aligns the dev and prod configurations, making them the same, hence the presented code change.

@kidroca kidroca marked this pull request as ready for review November 3, 2023 20:02
@kidroca kidroca requested a review from a team as a code owner November 3, 2023 20:02
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from robertKozik and removed request for a team November 3, 2023 20:02
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 3, 2023

@robertKozik 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]

@kidroca kidroca force-pushed the kidroca/chore/prod-no-console branch from 12c9100 to 9579930 Compare November 3, 2023 20:04
Comment on lines +73 to +77
env: {
production: {
plugins: ['transform-remove-console', {exclude: ['error', 'warn']}],
},
},
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 should preserve, the error and warn logs, because they aren't used frequently to impact the UX

That's why I've opted to keep them (exclude them from removal) here

@ospfranco
Copy link
Contributor

How is the app reporting errors and crashes? Usually, the library of choice has a way to not completely disable logs but rather buffer them and choose a transport. By transport, you can then choose console output or Sentry or w/e.

@kidroca
Copy link
Contributor Author

kidroca commented Nov 4, 2023

How is the app reporting errors and crashes? Usually, the library of choice has a way to not completely disable logs but rather buffer them and choose a transport. By transport, you can then choose console output or Sentry or w/e.

I believe the current setup uses Firebase Crashlytics to capture crashes and errors

As for log transport, Expensify employs its proprietary logging library that transmits logs to the backend. In this PR, our primary objective is to cease the echoing of these logs on the client device without affecting the backend transmission.

@mountiny mountiny added the InternalQA This pull request required internal QA label Nov 5, 2023
@robertKozik
Copy link
Contributor

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 debug mobile no logs
Android: mWeb Chrome android web
iOS: Native image
iOS: mWeb Safari ios web
MacOS: Chrome / Safari web debug Screenshot 2023-11-06 at 21 10 53
MacOS: Desktop Screenshot 2023-11-06 at 21 10 53

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from mountiny November 6, 2023 22:03
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.

Thanks for the changes

@mountiny mountiny merged commit af8999b into Expensify:main Nov 7, 2023
15 of 18 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Nov 7, 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.

@kidroca kidroca deleted the kidroca/chore/prod-no-console branch November 7, 2023 15:03
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Nov 8, 2023

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.3.96-6 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Nov 9, 2023

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 1.3.96-15 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.3.98-0 🚀

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

@roryabraham
Copy link
Contributor

Asked about QA in slack

@kidroca
Copy link
Contributor Author

kidroca commented Nov 14, 2023

Asked about QA in slack

This PR is focused on performance optimization and doesn't introduce new features or bug fixes. Therefore, it might not require the usual QA procedures. However, I suggest the following:

  1. Standard Regression Testing: To ensure no existing functionalities are affected.
  2. Performance Check: If possible, a comparison against staging/prod on mobile native platforms to observe any performance improvements.

I'm not familiar with the QA process, so if this approach isn't suitable or if performance gains aren't easily measurable, I understand that a standard QA might not be applicable here.

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

The QA can be done in production too, we just need to check if there are no logs in server from the native apps.

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

mountiny commented Nov 14, 2023

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 1.3.98-5 🚀

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
InternalQA This pull request required internal QA
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants