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

fix: Approving a report causes the workspace chat to “flash” in the LHN before disappearing #35928

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Mar 8, 2024

Conversation

tienifr
Copy link
Contributor

@tienifr tienifr commented Feb 6, 2024

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #35309
PROPOSAL: #35309 (comment)

Tests

  1. Make sure user A (submitter) and user B (approver) on a workspace with scheduled submit (e.g. delayed submission)
  2. Have user A create a request via Request money
  3. Have user A submit the report
  4. As user B, user A’s workspace chat will show unread in the LHN
  5. As user B, tap into user A’s report, approve it
  6. Verify that the green dot disappear immediately if there's no more IOU to approve/pay
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as above

QA Steps

  1. Make sure user A (submitter) and user B (approver) on a workspace with scheduled submit (e.g. delayed submission)
  2. Have user A create a request via Request money
  3. Have user A submit the report
  4. As user B, user A’s workspace chat will show unread in the LHN
  5. As user B, tap into user A’s report, approve it
  6. Verify that the green dot disappear immediately if there's no more IOU to approve/pay
  • 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 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.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
Screen.Recording.2024-02-14.at.15.12.02.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
Screen.Recording.2024-02-14.at.14.58.07.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-02-14.at.14.56.14.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-02-07.at.00.23.32.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2024-02-07.at.00.27.34.mov

@tienifr tienifr marked this pull request as ready for review February 6, 2024 17:34
@tienifr tienifr requested a review from a team as a code owner February 6, 2024 17:34
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from situchan and removed request for a team February 6, 2024 17:34
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 6, 2024

@situchan 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]

@tienifr
Copy link
Contributor Author

tienifr commented Feb 23, 2024

@situchan any updates?

@situchan
Copy link
Contributor

@tienifr please merge main. I will complete review today

@tienifr
Copy link
Contributor Author

tienifr commented Feb 26, 2024

@situchan merged

@situchan

This comment was marked as outdated.

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.

As we made shouldShowSettlementButtton, hasIOUToApproveOrPay utils, can we also apply these to the places where you referenced this logic?

@tienifr
Copy link
Contributor Author

tienifr commented Feb 27, 2024

I just refactored the PR to create shouldShowPayButton and shouldShowApproveButton. Even though there're some duplicated codes in 2 these functions but it's the tradeoff. We need to use shouldShowPayButton and shouldShowApproveButton in many places so create the utils function can help prevent the inconsistency bug. Beside these duplicated code are so simple

@tienifr
Copy link
Contributor Author

tienifr commented Feb 27, 2024

@situchan Can you help check #35928 (comment). I re-tested and it worked well

@tienifr
Copy link
Contributor Author

tienifr commented Feb 29, 2024

@situchan I just resolved the conflicts, can you help review soon? Thanks

@tienifr
Copy link
Contributor Author

tienifr commented Mar 1, 2024

DM to @situchan

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.

Code now looks much better

@tienifr
Copy link
Contributor Author

tienifr commented Mar 4, 2024

@situchan any updates?

@tienifr
Copy link
Contributor Author

tienifr commented Mar 6, 2024

Bump @situchan on 1:1

src/libs/actions/IOU.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/libs/actions/IOU.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/libs/actions/IOU.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/libs/actions/IOU.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@situchan
Copy link
Contributor

situchan commented Mar 6, 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: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
multiple.requests.mov
single.request.mov
MacOS: Desktop

@situchan
Copy link
Contributor

situchan commented Mar 6, 2024

@tienifr all good after addressing feedback above

@tienifr
Copy link
Contributor Author

tienifr commented Mar 7, 2024

@situchan Thanks for your suggestion. I updated

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from iwiznia March 7, 2024 06:43
@@ -227,14 +227,14 @@ function isPaidGroupPolicy(policy: OnyxEntry<Policy> | EmptyObject): boolean {
* Checks if policy's scheduled submit / auto reporting frequency is "instant".
* Note: Free policies have "instant" submit always enabled.
*/
function isInstantSubmitEnabled(policy: OnyxEntry<Policy>): boolean {
function isInstantSubmitEnabled(policy: OnyxEntry<Policy> | EmptyObject): boolean {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this to support the case when the policy is not loaded or what?
And if so, why was it not needed before?

Copy link
Contributor

@situchan situchan Mar 7, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's same as other cases if you see next line.

policy?.autoReportingFrequency
policy has optional chaining for nothing.

This came from the fact that Onyx values are optional (null on fist component render, before Onyx data is loaded)

@@ -3691,10 +3691,75 @@ function sendMoneyWithWallet(report: OnyxTypes.Report, amount: number, currency:
Report.notifyNewAction(params.chatReportID, managerID);
}

function shouldShowPayButton(iouReport: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Report> | EmptyObject, chatReport: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Report> | EmptyObject, policy: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Policy> | EmptyObject) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Loooove these helper methods since they removed duplication and made code easier to follow ❤️

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this really determining if we need to show the button or is it really determining canIOUBePaid?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Especially here is weird to call a method called shouldShowPayButton

const iouSettled = ReportUtils.isSettled(iouReport?.reportID);
const isOnInstantSubmitPolicy = PolicyUtils.isInstantSubmitEnabled(policy);
const isOnSubmitAndClosePolicy = PolicyUtils.isSubmitAndClose(policy);
if (!isPaidGroupPolicy) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not sure how costly the methods above are, but maybe consider moving this if to be right at the top?

return isPayer && !isDraftExpenseReport && !iouSettled && !iouReport?.isWaitingOnBankAccount && reimbursableSpend !== 0 && !iouCanceled && !isAutoReimbursable;
}

function shouldShowApproveButton(
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same here, should this be canApproveIOU?

@tienifr
Copy link
Contributor Author

tienifr commented Mar 8, 2024

@iwiznia Thanks for your suggestion. I updated the PR

@iwiznia iwiznia merged commit a2c24e1 into Expensify:main Mar 8, 2024
15 checks passed
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot added the Emergency label Mar 8, 2024
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 8, 2024

@iwiznia looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Mar 8, 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.

@iwiznia
Copy link
Contributor

iwiznia commented Mar 8, 2024

It was a mistake, I thought they had already passed. Given the perf tests broke, going to revert this.

@situchan
Copy link
Contributor

situchan commented Mar 8, 2024

@iwiznia looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

This seems to be happening on other PRs as well

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 1.4.50-5 🚀

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

onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${expenseReport?.chatReportID}`,
value: {
hasOutstandingChildRequest: hasIOUToApproveOrPay(chatReport, expenseReport?.reportID ?? ''),
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We missed to check if the report was fully approved before passing expenseReport?.reportID, this caused the bug #43014

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