Fix: Duplicate phone number can be invited #33928

DylanDylann · 2024-01-04T08:43:06Z

Details

Because the PR Fix/30190: Duplicate phone number can be invited to room #31010 has been reverted based on Fix/30190: Duplicate phone number can be invited to room #31010 (comment), so we need to create this PR again to fix the issue "Room - Can invite valid phone account multiple times into the room".

Fixed Issues

$ #30190
PROPOSAL: #30190 (comment)

Tests

Create a WS
Create a room with workspace
Click room header => Members => Invite
Input an phone (eg: +3233232432) then select and click invite
Input the phone number in step 4 in search box again
Observe that there is no option to select and the message ${login} is already a member of ${name} is displayed

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Create a WS
Create a room with workspace
Click room header => Members => Invite
Input an phone (eg: +3233232432) then select and click invite
Input the phone number in step 4 in search box again
Observe that there is no option to select and the message ${login} is already a member of ${name} is displayed

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screencast.from.04-01-2024.15.49.30.webm

MacOS: Desktop

melvin-bot · 2024-01-04T08:50:53Z

@rushatgabhane 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]

rushatgabhane · 2024-01-08T12:52:53Z

@DylanDylann how is this PR different from the previous one? How have we optimized the filtering?

DylanDylann · 2024-01-08T19:22:21Z

@rushatgabhane I think we need to test if this PR causes the regression first. Because this one and PR are reverted at the same time

DylanDylann · 2024-01-17T07:02:01Z

@rushatgabhanePlease help review the PR again once you have a chance. cc @mountiny

rushatgabhane · 2024-01-17T07:03:11Z

@mountiny someone with a high activity account will have to test it.

DylanDylann · 2024-01-17T07:33:20Z

src/pages/RoomInvitePage.js

@@ -74,7 +74,10 @@ function RoomInvitePage(props) {

    // Any existing participants and Expensify emails should not be eligible for invitation
    const excludedUsers = useMemo(
-        () => [...PersonalDetailsUtils.getLoginsByAccountIDs(lodashGet(props.report, 'visibleChatMemberAccountIDs', [])), ...CONST.EXPENSIFY_EMAILS],
+        () =>
+            _.map([...PersonalDetailsUtils.getLoginsByAccountIDs(lodashGet(props.report, 'visibleChatMemberAccountIDs', [])), ...CONST.EXPENSIFY_EMAILS], (participant) =>


@rushatgabhane Note that, this PR is the same as the original PR, except that we use visibleChatMemberAccountIDs rather than participantAccountIDs

mountiny · 2024-01-18T02:48:04Z

Sorry for delay creating a new build

github-actions · 2024-01-18T03:12:34Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, Desktop, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/android/33928/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/ios/33928/index.html

Desktop 💻	Web 🕸️
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/desktop/33928/NewExpensify.dmg	https://33928.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

mountiny · 2024-01-18T19:12:50Z

@muttmuure confirmed the search if working fine for him

mountiny · 2024-01-19T14:32:10Z

@conorpendergrast also confirmed it works well so @rushatgabhane @DylanDylann I think you guys can continue with this

DylanDylann · 2024-01-24T04:08:05Z

@rushatgabhane Please help review the PR again once you have a chance

rushatgabhane · 2024-01-25T17:02:11Z

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: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

Beamanator · 2024-01-26T12:48:46Z

Everything will go smoothly this time 🙏

OSBotify · 2024-01-26T12:52:37Z

✋ 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 · 2024-01-29T19:23:48Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/Beamanator in version: 1.4.33-0 🚀

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

mountiny · 2024-01-29T21:56:47Z

Everything will go smoothly this time 🙏

Some people are again experiencing unusable Search in staging 😬

Beamanator · 2024-01-30T07:34:33Z

friiiick

mountiny · 2024-01-30T12:38:14Z

I am not sure, after revert the app works fine, but we did test this ad hoc build before.

I believe we should either hold this on pagination or try to think of some other appraoch

OSBotify · 2024-01-31T02:30:39Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/francoisl in version: 1.4.33-5 🚀

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

fix duplicate phone number can be invited

d5278ef

DylanDylann marked this pull request as ready for review January 4, 2024 08:50

DylanDylann requested a review from a team as a code owner January 4, 2024 08:50

melvin-bot bot requested review from rushatgabhane and removed request for a team January 4, 2024 08:50

This was referenced Jan 4, 2024

Fix/30190: Duplicate phone number can be invited to room #31010

Merged

[$500] Room - Can invite valid phone account multiple times into the room #30190

Closed

mountiny added the Ready To Build label Jan 4, 2024

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

parasharrajat mentioned this pull request Jan 4, 2024

[$500] Room - When user tries to invite an already invited room member,"no results found " displayed #33906

Closed

6 tasks

Merge branch 'main' into fix/30190

8bd0a5e

DylanDylann commented Jan 17, 2024

View reviewed changes

mountiny assigned DylanDylann Jan 19, 2024

Merge branch 'main' into fix/30190

f7378fc

DylanDylann added 2 commits January 26, 2024 15:41

fix merge main

9a0343c

fix ts

0805a93

rushatgabhane approved these changes Jan 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from Beamanator January 26, 2024 12:13

Beamanator approved these changes Jan 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

Beamanator merged commit 54013d3 into Expensify:main Jan 26, 2024
16 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Jan 29, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-01-29 #35328

Closed

mountiny mentioned this pull request Jan 29, 2024

[CP Staging] Revert "Fix: Duplicate phone number can be invited" #35335

Merged

49 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Fix: Duplicate phone number can be invited #33928

Fix: Duplicate phone number can be invited #33928

DylanDylann commented Jan 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 4, 2024

This comment has been minimized.

rushatgabhane commented Jan 8, 2024

DylanDylann commented Jan 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

DylanDylann commented Jan 17, 2024

rushatgabhane commented Jan 17, 2024 •

edited

Loading

DylanDylann Jan 17, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mountiny commented Jan 18, 2024

github-actions bot commented Jan 18, 2024

mountiny commented Jan 18, 2024

mountiny commented Jan 19, 2024

DylanDylann commented Jan 24, 2024

rushatgabhane commented Jan 25, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Beamanator commented Jan 26, 2024

OSBotify commented Jan 26, 2024

OSBotify commented Jan 29, 2024

mountiny commented Jan 29, 2024

Beamanator commented Jan 30, 2024

mountiny commented Jan 30, 2024

OSBotify commented Jan 31, 2024

Fix: Duplicate phone number can be invited #33928

Fix: Duplicate phone number can be invited #33928

Conversation

DylanDylann commented Jan 4, 2024 • edited Loading

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 4, 2024

This comment has been minimized.

rushatgabhane commented Jan 8, 2024

DylanDylann commented Jan 8, 2024 • edited Loading

DylanDylann commented Jan 17, 2024

rushatgabhane commented Jan 17, 2024 • edited Loading

DylanDylann Jan 17, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mountiny commented Jan 18, 2024

github-actions bot commented Jan 18, 2024

mountiny commented Jan 18, 2024

mountiny commented Jan 19, 2024

DylanDylann commented Jan 24, 2024

rushatgabhane commented Jan 25, 2024 • edited Loading

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Beamanator commented Jan 26, 2024

OSBotify commented Jan 26, 2024

OSBotify commented Jan 29, 2024

mountiny commented Jan 29, 2024

Beamanator commented Jan 30, 2024

mountiny commented Jan 30, 2024

OSBotify commented Jan 31, 2024

DylanDylann commented Jan 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

DylanDylann commented Jan 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

rushatgabhane commented Jan 17, 2024 •

edited

Loading

DylanDylann Jan 17, 2024 •

edited

Loading

rushatgabhane commented Jan 25, 2024 •

edited

Loading