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

Reintroduce receipt recovery skipping distance requests #32562

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jan 3, 2024

Conversation

Gonals
Copy link
Contributor

@Gonals Gonals commented Dec 6, 2023

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #28884
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  1. Open a chat in NewDot and click + -> Request Money -> Scan and upload a file that will fail in the backend. This corrupt file works:
    CORRUPT.pdf

  2. Open the Money Request report chat. After a second or two, the request should fail and you should see this message:

Screenshot 2023-10-17 at 5 22 42 PM
  1. Click on it and confirm you can download the file (Note that. refreshing or closing the app will make the file unavailable)

  2. Go offline.

  3. Create a Distance Money request through > + > Request money > Distance.

  4. Enter vague addresses - SF for Start and LA for Finish point.

  5. Create the Distance expense.

  6. Go online.

  7. Confirm the error is not the receipt-related one:

Screenshot 2023-12-06 at 1 39 22 PM
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

No changes

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
      • 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 2023-10-18 at 4 44 54 PM
Android: mWeb Chrome Screenshot 2023-10-18 at 4 42 20 PM
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari Screenshot 2023-10-18 at 4 34 07 PM
MacOS: Chrome / Safari Screenshot 2023-10-17 at 5 22 52 PM
MacOS: Desktop Screenshot 2023-10-18 at 1 48 16 PM

@Gonals Gonals self-assigned this Dec 6, 2023
@Gonals Gonals requested a review from a team as a code owner December 6, 2023 12:30
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from 0xmiros and removed request for a team December 6, 2023 12:30
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Dec 6, 2023

@0xmiroslav 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]

@trjExpensify
Copy link
Contributor

Hey @0xmiroslav if you haven't got the capacity to review this, can you please speak up so we can find another volunteer? Thanks!

@situchan
Copy link
Contributor

I can do quick review if needed

@0xmiros
Copy link
Contributor

0xmiros commented Dec 14, 2023

@situchan go ahead. thanks

@trjExpensify trjExpensify requested review from situchan and removed request for 0xmiros December 14, 2023 09:28
@trjExpensify
Copy link
Contributor

Perfect, assigned you @situchan. Thanks!

@situchan
Copy link
Contributor

@Gonals please merge main as 1.7k commits are behind

@Gonals
Copy link
Contributor Author

Gonals commented Dec 15, 2023

@Gonals please merge main as 1.7k commits are behind

Done

@Gonals
Copy link
Contributor Author

Gonals commented Dec 19, 2023

@situchan bump!

@situchan
Copy link
Contributor

While testing distance request, got weird bug of showing as if scan request:

Screenshot 2023-12-19 at 8 14 57 PM

Expected:

Screenshot 2023-12-19 at 8 16 48 PM

@situchan
Copy link
Contributor

It's strange.
I reproduced this bug on this branch.
Switched to main branch to see if it's existing bug. But not reproducible.
And then switched to this branch and no longer reproducible.

src/libs/actions/IOU.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@Gonals
Copy link
Contributor Author

Gonals commented Dec 20, 2023

It's strange. I reproduced this bug on this branch. Switched to main branch to see if it's existing bug. But not reproducible. And then switched to this branch and no longer reproducible.

Maybe just some backend downtime? 🤷

@situchan
Copy link
Contributor

It's strange. I reproduced this bug on this branch. Switched to main branch to see if it's existing bug. But not reproducible. And then switched to this branch and no longer reproducible.

Maybe just some backend downtime? 🤷

No, it already happened optimistically (before api call)

@Gonals
Copy link
Contributor Author

Gonals commented Dec 20, 2023

It's strange. I reproduced this bug on this branch. Switched to main branch to see if it's existing bug. But not reproducible. And then switched to this branch and no longer reproducible.

Maybe just some backend downtime? 🤷

No, it already happened optimistically (before api call)

Huh. Weird.
Well, it displays the expected error! 😁

@Gonals
Copy link
Contributor Author

Gonals commented Dec 27, 2023

@situchan, bump!

@situchan
Copy link
Contributor

situchan commented Jan 3, 2024

I am trying to reproduce #31834 in the case of split distance request which is not handled in this PR. But the error doesn't come from backend so not able to test.

split.distance.mov

@situchan
Copy link
Contributor

situchan commented Jan 3, 2024

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(theme.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 the PR modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label so the design team can review the changes.
  • 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.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
ios.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
msafari.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web-manual.mov
web-scan.mov
web-split-manual.mov
web-split-scan.mov
MacOS: Desktop
desktop.mov

@situchan
Copy link
Contributor

situchan commented Jan 3, 2024

Screenshot 2024-01-03

Requesting money to new user doesn't work. Report error instead of report action error.

mchrome.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.

Approving in case above issues are out of scope

Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 3, 2024

@NikkiWines 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]

@Gonals
Copy link
Contributor Author

Gonals commented Jan 3, 2024

Approving in case above issues are out of scope

Yep. I don't think they are related

Copy link
Contributor

@NikkiWines NikkiWines left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good 👍

@NikkiWines NikkiWines merged commit b3f1456 into main Jan 3, 2024
16 checks passed
@NikkiWines NikkiWines deleted the alberto-fixReceiptError branch January 3, 2024 17:00
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Jan 3, 2024

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Jan 4, 2024

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/NikkiWines in version: 1.4.22-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Jan 4, 2024

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/NikkiWines in version: 1.4.22-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Jan 9, 2024

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.4.22-6 🚀

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.

6 participants