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

Adds Violations Requirements to MoneyRequestConfirmationList #31380

Conversation

cdanwards
Copy link
Contributor

@cdanwards cdanwards commented Nov 15, 2023

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #31090
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Configuring Categories and Tags in Old Dot

For Categories:

  • Go to Settings > Workspaces > [the workspace] > Categories.
  • Turn on "People must categorize expenses".
  • Ensure at least one category is enabled.

For Tags:

  • Go to Settings > Workspaces > [the workspace] > Tags.
  • Turn on "People must tag expenses".
  • Ensure at least one tag is enabled. Make sure "Do you want to use multiple levels of" is off.

Test Steps

General Steps:

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console.
  • Set the canUseViolations Permissions to true within the Permissions file.

Case 1: Neither Categories nor Tags Required

  • Follow steps to disable both categories and tags in system settings.
  • Begin creating a new Money Request and proceed to the Confirmation Screen.
  • Tap the dropdown button. Verify neither Categories nor Tags display a Required tag.

Case 2: Both Categories and Tags Required

  • Enable both categories and tags in system settings.
  • Begin a new Money Request and proceed to the Confirmation Screen.
  • Tap the dropdown button. Verify both Categories and Tags display a Required tag.

Case 3: Only Categories Required

  • Enable categories and disable tags in system settings.
  • Begin a new Money Request and proceed to the Confirmation Screen.
  • Tap the dropdown button. Verify Categories display a Required tag and Tags do not.

Case 4: Only Tags Required

  • Disable categories and enable tags in system settings.
  • Begin a new Money Request and proceed to the Confirmation Screen.
  • Tap the dropdown button. Verify Tags display a Required tag and Categories do not.

Additional Steps for Forced Requirement Display

  • This is for development purposes to force display requirements regardless of actual settings.
  • In MoneyRequestConfirmationList, set shouldShowTags and shouldShowCategories to true.
  • In the same file, in the respective MenuItems, set Boolean(props.policy.requiresCategories) and Boolean(props.policy.requiresTags) to true. Note: This will cause an error if not implemented correctly due to normal guards being disabled.
  • Follow the general test steps for each case.

Offline tests

Same as Tests

QA Steps

QA should be skipped for now: see here

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: 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 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.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native Android_Required
Android: mWeb Chrome mWeb_Android_Required
iOS: Native ios_native
iOS: mWeb Safari mWeb_iOS_Required
MacOS: Chrome / Safari web_Required
MacOS: Desktop desktop_Required

@cdanwards cdanwards marked this pull request as ready for review November 15, 2023 16:20
@cdanwards cdanwards requested a review from a team as a code owner November 15, 2023 16:20
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from ntdiary and removed request for a team November 15, 2023 16:20
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 15, 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]

@cdanwards
Copy link
Contributor Author

cdanwards commented Nov 15, 2023

There might actually be a change of the word used in the label. Conversation happening in Slack: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1700064505893339

This is resolved.

@@ -699,6 +698,7 @@ function MoneyRequestConfirmationList(props) {
titleStyle={styles.flex1}
disabled={didConfirm}
interactive={!props.isReadOnly}
rightLabel={Permissions.canUseViolations() && Boolean(props.policy.requiresCategory) ? translate('common.required') : ''}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Everything looks good, but I need to make sure we're setting requiresCategory and requiresTag in the policy object in Onyx

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@cead22 is that something to be addressed here or in a separate issue?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I confirmed this is how this is supposed to be 👍

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@cead22 just following up here. I'm rewriting the testing instructions and I've set the proper requirements in old Dot to have categories and tags be required, however I'm not seeing requiresTags or requiresCategories coming through anywhere on the props from Onyx, in the policy object or otherwise. props.policyTags.Tag.required comes through correctly but that's it.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah that's fine, maybe we can skip QA steps that depend on those values being true for now, since the backend change for that isn't ready yet

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Alright @cead22, I updated the test cases and made a note in the QA section that links to this thread.

@cead22
Copy link
Contributor

cead22 commented Nov 16, 2023

@cdanwards can you update your tests and QA sections

  • Make it clear in the test section that all cases should be tested, ie, when neither category or tag is required, when both are required, and when only one is required
  • Add steps to configure the policy for the cases above. These settings can be configured in old dot, by going to
    • For categories: Settings > Workspaces > [the workspace] > Categories > Switch on the toggle "People must categorize expenses", and make sure there's at least 1 enabled category
    • For tags: Settings > Workspaces > [the workspace] > Tags > Switch on the toggle "People must tag expenses", and make sure there's at least 1 enabled tag ("Do you want to use multiple levels of" should be off
  • QA steps need to be doable by Applause, and they can't really set anything to return true -- they're running whatever code is on staging, so the QA steps should list things they can do in order to test the changes

@cead22
Copy link
Contributor

cead22 commented Nov 16, 2023

@shawnborton can you please take a look and see if we need different styles on the Required text?

@ntdiary
Copy link
Contributor

ntdiary commented Nov 17, 2023

Hi @cead22, I need to test another relatively complex modal refocusing issue first. Could you please un-assign me here or assign another C+ if needed? 😄

@shawnborton
Copy link
Contributor

Yup, we do need some style adjustments. The text should be using our textSupporting color, and it should be in our label font size (13px).

@shawnborton
Copy link
Contributor

Original screenshot for reference:
image

@situchan
Copy link
Contributor

@cdanwards after pulling main, app crashes

ERROR ReferenceError: Property 'Permissions' doesn't exist

Copy link
Contributor

@situchan situchan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

use usePermissions() hook.
Check #31420 for reference.

src/styles/styles.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@cdanwards
Copy link
Contributor Author

@situchan thanks for the review! I'll get it updated.

src/components/MenuItem.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/styles/styles.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/components/MenuItem.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@situchan
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
Android: mWeb Chrome mchrome
iOS: Native
ios.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
msafari.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web.mov
MacOS: Desktop
desktop.mov

Copy link
Contributor

@situchan situchan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

:shipit:

@cead22 cead22 merged commit 2c00104 into Expensify:main Nov 20, 2023
17 of 22 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/cead22 in version: 1.4.2-0 🚀

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

@izarutskaya
Copy link

Hello @cdanwards, can you please help us, where I can set the canUseViolations Permissions to true? Thank you

@cdanwards
Copy link
Contributor Author

@izarutskaya apologies! If you're able to access the Permissions file, you can set the function to return true there. I'll update this in the comment above.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 1.4.2-3 🚀

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

@cdanwards cdanwards deleted the cdanwards/violations/required-confirmation-list branch November 27, 2023 14:27
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.

7 participants