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

Revert "Merge pull request #4085 from Expensify/chirag-revert-3979" #4133

Conversation

dklymenk
Copy link
Contributor

@dklymenk dklymenk commented Jul 18, 2021

This reverts commit c2f92b6.

@chiragsalian this a PR related to our discussion here #3979 (comment)

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #3743
$ #3293

Tests / QA Steps

  1. Send a message. You should see it in LHN.
  2. Delete that message. The LHN should say "[Comment deleted]".
  3. Refresh the page. Wait a few seconds. The LHN should still say "[Comment deleted]".
  4. Send IOU. You should see "Requested €123 from A" or something like that in LHN.
  5. Refresh the page. Wait a few seconds. It should still say "Requested €123 from A" and not "[Comment deleted]". (This one requires Display money request in LHN, instead of user's email #3737 to be fixed).

Tested On

  • Web
  • Mobile Web
  • Desktop
  • iOS
  • Android

Screenshots

Web

3747-3293-web.mp4

Mobile Web

Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.8.-.2021-07-12.at.15.19.55.mp4

Desktop

Screen.Recording.2021-07-12.at.15.22.22.mov

iOS

Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.12.-.2021-07-12.at.15.28.56.mp4

Android

3747-3293-android.mp4

@dklymenk dklymenk marked this pull request as ready for review September 28, 2021 09:02
@dklymenk dklymenk requested a review from a team as a code owner September 28, 2021 09:02
@MelvinBot MelvinBot requested review from iwiznia and removed request for a team September 28, 2021 09:02
@iwiznia iwiznia requested review from chiragsalian and removed request for iwiznia September 28, 2021 13:34
@chiragsalian
Copy link
Contributor

Hmm, I don't get why we show "[Comment deleted]" when there are previous messages. If it's the first and only message then I think "[Comment deleted]" is fine but otherwise couldn't we show the previous message in the LHN @dklymenk?

I briefly checked the code and it looks like we refer lastActionMessage but that's something received from the backend. So I think it's nice that you have this fallback for "[Comment deleted]" but I think we should update our backend to return the lastActionMessage that actually has message content. But that will involve further testing to confirm nothing else is broken, thoughts?

@dklymenk
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hmm, I don't get why we show "[Comment deleted]" when there are previous messages. If it's the first and only message then I think "[Comment deleted]" is fine but otherwise couldn't we show the previous message in the LHN @dklymenk?

I briefly checked the code and it looks like we refer lastActionMessage but that's something received from the backend. So I think it's nice that you have this fallback for "[Comment deleted]" but I think we should update our backend to return the lastActionMessage that actually has message content. But that will involve further testing to confirm nothing else is broken, thoughts?

I don't think showing the actual last message during initial load is an issue, however updating it in real time is. I have had submitted 2 or 3 proposals in total with an implementation that works, but no matter what you do you are basically required to fetch the next last message from onyx storage every time you receive a Pusher update. It has been determined that if we cannot implement this without onyx, we shouldn't do it and instead stick to [Comment deleted]. See these 2 comments: #3743 (comment) #3743 (comment)

Also the original PR #3979 has been approved and merged. The only reason it was reverted in the first place, as you probably remember, is because in combination with #3737 it resulted in [Comment deleted] message to be shown if the last comment was an IOU. Now that #3737 is fixed and the original PR is still applicable, it means that it is still valid, right?

@chiragsalian
Copy link
Contributor

Yup, i think your solution here is totally good. I guess I was thinking of another improvement that could be done on the backend to make the user experience even better which adds to the code you have here. But I guess that's for another time.

chiragsalian
chiragsalian previously approved these changes Sep 30, 2021
Copy link
Contributor

@chiragsalian chiragsalian 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 to me. But i cannot merge it at this time since the parent issue has N6-HOLD label. So i'll go ahead and add HOLD to this PR. Once the N6-HOLD label is removed let me know and I'll merge this PR 🙂

@chiragsalian chiragsalian changed the title Revert "Merge pull request #4085 from Expensify/chirag-revert-3979" [HOLD] Revert "Merge pull request #4085 from Expensify/chirag-revert-3979" Sep 30, 2021
@parasharrajat
Copy link
Member

Hold is gold here. #5571 can severely affect the outcome of this PR.

@NikkiWines
Copy link
Contributor

I'm pretty sure the end solution for #5571 won't impact this PR, this should be good to go after merging in master

@parasharrajat
Copy link
Member

Oops sorry if this is stalled due to my comment. It was pretty old. Yup, we are good to go...

@mallenexpensify mallenexpensify changed the title [HOLD] Revert "Merge pull request #4085 from Expensify/chirag-revert-3979" Revert "Merge pull request #4085 from Expensify/chirag-revert-3979" Nov 5, 2021
@mallenexpensify
Copy link
Contributor

Per @parasharrajat and @NikkiWines comment above, I removed [HOLD] from the title. @chiragsalian can you review and/or help move this along? Thanks

@chiragsalian
Copy link
Contributor

Oh, i was waiting for an update from @dklymenk to know when it's ready for review. Can you let me know @dklymenk when it's ready for review? I see you have a travis error so at the moment I'm assuming you are working on addressing those. If not or you need any help let me know 🙂

@dklymenk
Copy link
Contributor Author

dklymenk commented Nov 8, 2021

Oh, sorry. I completely forgot that you were waiting for my signal on hold removal.

No I am not working on resolving that e2e test issue. It came up after I fixed a conflict 3 weeks ago. It looks like some package wasn't fetched properly during installation or something. My changes don't touch anything in iOS folder, so I am pretty sure that error has nothing to do with this PR.

Please let me know If you want me do anything. I just want these issues get closed already.

Once again I am sorry for not writing here about hold removal. I honestly thought you were all busy or something.

@NikkiWines
Copy link
Contributor

@dklymenk you might try merging main into your branch and see if that resolves the e2e issue. This branch is 662 commits behind Expensify:main, so it's a good idea to merge it even if it doesn't end up fixing the tests.

@dklymenk
Copy link
Contributor Author

dklymenk commented Nov 8, 2021

Merged main into the branch. Tested the changes. Still looking good.

The e2e test seems to have passed the stage it failed at last time. Hopefully, it finishes successfully and we get to merge this.

@dklymenk
Copy link
Contributor Author

dklymenk commented Nov 9, 2021

@chiragsalian After merging main all tests have passed. The PR is ready for review once again.

Copy link
Contributor

@chiragsalian chiragsalian left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, i believe we have a merge freeze this week so i shouldn't merge this today and so i'll merge this next week.

@chiragsalian chiragsalian merged commit 8ca2cbb into Expensify:main Nov 16, 2021
@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 @chiragsalian in version: 1.1.15-18 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by @roryabraham in version: 1.1.16-10 🚀

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