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

Update money request options for different room types #31025

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Nov 8, 2023

Conversation

puneetlath
Copy link
Contributor

@puneetlath puneetlath commented Nov 7, 2023

Details

In trying to make https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/324780 work, I realized that we have special logic that makes it so that you can't request money on Control workspaces (only split bill). I tried to update an simplify the getMoneyRequestOptions logic to be:

  • split bill
    • chat rooms with multiple users
    • workspace chats (all, not just control as I wasn't aware of any reason to restrict, but I could be wrong about that cc @youssef-lr)
    • group DMs
  • request money
    • workspace chats (all kinds as long as its their own)
    • IOU/expense reports
    • DMs
  • send money
    • 1:1 DMs

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/324780
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  1. Click the plus button in a chat thread
  2. You should see no money request options (split, request, send)
  3. Click the plus button in a task
  4. You should see no money request options (split, request, send)
  5. Click the plus button in your chat with Concierge
  6. You should see no money request options (split, request, send)
  7. Log into accountA
  8. Locally, set the accountID in one of these constants to be the accountID of accountA
  9. Create a workspace in accountA and invite accountB
  10. Sign into accountB and click the plus button in your workspace chat
  11. You should see the request money and split bill options
  12. Go to a workspace chat in any user's account for a workspace not owned by accountA
  13. You should see the request money and split bill options
  14. Go to chat room with no other users in it
  15. You should see no money request options (split, request, send)
  16. Add another user to the room
  17. You should see the split bill option
  18. Go to a 1:1 DM
  19. You should see request and send, not split
  20. Go to a group DM with 2+ other people
  21. You should see only split
  22. Go to an IOU report that is not paid
  23. You should see only request
  24. Go to an IOU report that is paid
  25. You should see no money request options (split, request, send)
  26. Go to an expense report that is not paid
  27. You should see only request
  28. Go to an expense report that is paid
  29. You should see no money request options (split, request, send)
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as online tests.

QA Steps

Same as tests.

  • 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: 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 Screenshot 2023-11-07 at 6 12 44 PM
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native Screenshot 2023-11-07 at 4 57 53 PM
iOS: mWeb Safari Screenshot 2023-11-07 at 4 58 38 PM
MacOS: Chrome / Safari image
MacOS: Desktop Screenshot 2023-11-07 at 3 57 12 PM

@puneetlath puneetlath self-assigned this Nov 7, 2023
@puneetlath puneetlath marked this pull request as ready for review November 7, 2023 22:02
@puneetlath puneetlath requested a review from a team as a code owner November 7, 2023 22:02
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from ntdiary and removed request for a team November 7, 2023 22:02
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 7, 2023

@ntdiary 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]

@puneetlath
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ntdiary trying to get my android emulator working, but in the meantime, mind reviewing? There's no platform logic here.

@ntdiary
Copy link
Contributor

ntdiary commented Nov 8, 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: 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
thread report

31025-thread-report

task report

31025-task-report

concierge report

31025-concierge

workspace member

31025-workspace-member

workspace owner

31025-workspace-owner

chat room no other users

31025-room-no-other-users

chat room multi users

31025-room-multi-users

1:1 DM

31025-DM-single

2+ DM

31025-DM-group

IOU not paid

31025-iou-not-paid

IOU paid

31025-iou-paid

expense not paid

31025-expense-not-paid

expense paid

31025-expense-paid

MacOS: Desktop

@ntdiary
Copy link
Contributor

ntdiary commented Nov 8, 2023

@ntdiary trying to get my android emulator working, but in the meantime, mind reviewing? There's no platform logic here.

I put screenshots of these cases in the MacOS: Chrome / Safari section, and also tested on other platforms. Just don't quite understand the meaning of changing the accountID and how to change it 😂:

Locally, set the accountID in one of these constants to be the accountID of accountA

@puneetlath
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ahh @ntdiary basically if you change one of those constants to one of your accounts, then you can "pretend" that one of your accounts is a special expensify account and test accordingly.

Copy link
Contributor

@ntdiary ntdiary left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah, thank you, great explanation! LGTM :)

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from pecanoro November 8, 2023 17:17
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 8, 2023

@pecanoro 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]

Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 8, 2023

🎯 @ntdiary, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉

An E/App issue has been created to issue payment here: #31073.

src/libs/ReportUtils.js Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@youssef-lr youssef-lr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@pecanoro pecanoro merged commit fae9178 into main Nov 8, 2023
15 checks passed
@pecanoro pecanoro deleted the puneet-request-options branch November 8, 2023 19:59
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Nov 8, 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

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 1.3.97-7 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

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

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

@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
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants