Update logic to display pay button in paid policies #35347

marcochavezf · 2024-01-30T00:59:58Z

~~On hold for https://github.com/Expensify/Web-Expensify/pull/40709~~

Details

We don't want to display the Pay button in paid policies for all admins, only for the policy reimburser. This PR checks if the logged-in user is a reimburser; if so, we display the Pay button for group policies.

Fixed Issues

$ #34951

Tests

Create a collect policy in OldDot with direct reimbursement
Set the policy owner as reimburser
Execute the following JS snippet in the OldDot policy to enable workspace chats creation:

if (Url.getCurrentPageName()!="policy" ){ alert('Only run this snippet from a policy editor!'); } else { var p = Policy.getCurrent(); p.policy.isPolicyExpenseChatEnabled = "true"; p.save().done(function(){$.jGrowl('Workspace chat creation enabled!')}); }

Add a member and an approver (the approver can be an admin)
As the member, create a money request and submit it in the workspace chat
As the approver, approve the money request
As the reimburser, verify the Pay button is shown in the workspace
As non-reimburser admin (it can be the approver), verify the Pay button is not shown

Screen.Recording.2024-01-29.at.8.03.21.p.m.mov

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Same as test steps

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

MacOS: Desktop

melvin-bot · 2024-01-30T02:12:48Z

@c3024 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]

marcochavezf · 2024-01-30T02:14:29Z

Hi @c3024, the PR is on hold for a backend change, but meanwhile, can you provide me a few emails to add you as a member, approver, and admin for the testing policy?

c3024 · 2024-01-30T03:16:10Z

chaitanya3024+mem@gmail.com
chaitanya3024+app@gmail.com
chaitanya3024+adm@gmail.com

marcochavezf · 2024-02-06T00:22:48Z

@c3024 added to the testing collect workspace:

The backend changes were deployed to production, so this PR is ready for review

c3024 · 2024-02-06T09:51:31Z

src/components/MoneyReportHeader.tsx

@@ -60,9 +60,10 @@ function MoneyReportHeader({session, policy, chatReport, nextStep, report: money
    const isAutoReimbursable = ReportUtils.canBeAutoReimbursed(moneyRequestReport, policy);
    const isPaidGroupPolicy = ReportUtils.isPaidGroupPolicy(moneyRequestReport);
    const isManager = ReportUtils.isMoneyRequestReport(moneyRequestReport) && session?.accountID === moneyRequestReport.managerID;
+    const isReimburser = session?.email === policy?.reimburserEmail;


Might it be better to send the reimburser's accountID and compare it with session.accountID?

I think we standardised all to compare accountIDs. With comparing accountIDs, even if the reimburser changes their primary email, this check works fine. Reimbursers's email address can also remain hidden if we send only reimburser's accountID (though I don't think this is of much use.)

Oh good point, the problem is that we're setting the reimburser email in the backend from OldDot. I agree we should compare accountIDs but that means we'd need to refactor also OldDot to save the accountID when the reimburser is selected.

Said that, let's go for now with this change and we can refactor later to send the accountID when it becomes a problem or when the dashboard for policy settings is migrated to NewDot.

If the reimburser changes their primary email, then we might check to see if any of the reimbursers' validated email ids match with policy reimburser email. This is a rare and unlikely case and I am not sure if extra verbosity added is worth it. @marcochavezf

@marcochavezf should we just update BE now to send the accountID? Or do we assume that all policy users should have access to this email info

c3024 · 2024-02-07T19:48:04Z

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

payButtonAndroid.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

payButtonAndroidChrome.mp4

iOS: Native

payButtoniOS.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

payButtoniOSSafari.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

payButtonChrome.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

payButtonDesktop.mp4

c3024

LGTM

melvin-bot · 2024-02-07T20:12:58Z

@grgia 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]

grgia

LGTM, I kind of agree on the accountID argument- but I can let you decide if you want to merge now

marcochavezf · 2024-02-09T16:38:00Z

I will merge for now, since we're saving the reimburser email in the policy object, and in order to use the accountID in a standardized way (as we do it in other cases for App) we'd also need to change how we're saving it in the backend

OSBotify · 2024-02-09T16:43:03Z

✋ 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 · 2024-02-12T14:20:40Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcochavezf in version: 1.4.40-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2024-02-13T18:26:01Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.4.40-5 🚀

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

marcochavezf added 4 commits January 29, 2024 18:57

Add comments to reimbursement choices in CONST.ts

b8ecd41

Add reimburser email field to Policy type

9d1fd95

Update pay button logic in ReportPreview component

147dbb3

Update pay logic for payer in MoneyReportHeader

0f2c953

marcochavezf self-assigned this Jan 30, 2024

Merge branch 'main' into marco-displayPayButtonReimburser

8417107

marcochavezf marked this pull request as ready for review January 30, 2024 02:12

marcochavezf requested a review from a team as a code owner January 30, 2024 02:12

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team January 30, 2024 02:12

melvin-bot bot requested a review from c3024 January 30, 2024 02:12

marcochavezf mentioned this pull request Jan 30, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-03-14] [HOLD for payment #36814] [$500] [Collect approvers] Pay button appears for the approved report #34951

Closed

6 tasks

Merge branch 'main' into marco-displayPayButtonReimburser

d6d4081

marcochavezf changed the title ~~[HOLD] Update logic to display pay button in paid policies~~ Update logic to display pay button in paid policies Feb 6, 2024

c3024 reviewed Feb 6, 2024

View reviewed changes

c3024 approved these changes Feb 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from grgia February 7, 2024 20:12

grgia approved these changes Feb 9, 2024

View reviewed changes

marcochavezf merged commit 04fc886 into main Feb 9, 2024
20 of 23 checks passed

marcochavezf deleted the marco-displayPayButtonReimburser branch February 9, 2024 16:38

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Feb 12, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-02-12 #36335

Closed

90 tasks

Beamanator mentioned this pull request Feb 13, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-02-20] [$500] Expense - Pay elsewhere button does not show up for admin after approving the report #36398

Closed

6 tasks

mountiny mentioned this pull request Feb 13, 2024

[CP Staging] Revert "Update logic to display pay button in paid policies" #36424

Merged

50 tasks

hoangzinh mentioned this pull request Feb 15, 2024

[$500] IOU-Dropdown menu to select approve is not displayed #36410

Closed

6 tasks

c3024 mentioned this pull request Feb 28, 2024

pay conditions based on reimbursement settings #36814

Merged

50 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Update logic to display pay button in paid policies #35347

Update logic to display pay button in paid policies #35347

marcochavezf commented Jan 30, 2024 •

edited

Loading

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 30, 2024

marcochavezf commented Jan 30, 2024

c3024 commented Jan 30, 2024

marcochavezf commented Feb 6, 2024

c3024 Feb 6, 2024

marcochavezf Feb 6, 2024

c3024 Feb 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

grgia Feb 9, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

c3024 left a comment

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 7, 2024

grgia left a comment

marcochavezf commented Feb 9, 2024

OSBotify commented Feb 9, 2024

OSBotify commented Feb 12, 2024

OSBotify commented Feb 13, 2024

Update logic to display pay button in paid policies #35347

Update logic to display pay button in paid policies #35347

Conversation

marcochavezf commented Jan 30, 2024 • edited Loading

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 30, 2024

marcochavezf commented Jan 30, 2024

c3024 commented Jan 30, 2024

marcochavezf commented Feb 6, 2024

c3024 Feb 6, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

marcochavezf Feb 6, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

c3024 Feb 7, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

grgia Feb 9, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

c3024 commented Feb 7, 2024 • edited Loading

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

c3024 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 7, 2024

grgia left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

marcochavezf commented Feb 9, 2024

OSBotify commented Feb 9, 2024

OSBotify commented Feb 12, 2024

OSBotify commented Feb 13, 2024

marcochavezf commented Jan 30, 2024 •

edited

Loading

c3024 Feb 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

c3024 commented Feb 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading