fix: Pay someone - Add receipt placeholder is shown when receipt is not allowed when paying someone #41635

Krishna2323 · 2024-05-04T05:17:28Z

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #41489
PROPOSAL: #41489 (comment)

Tests

Go to FAB > Pay someone > Enter amount > Select user > Submit
Open the paid IOU request > Verify Add receipt placeholder is not shown
Open any paid or approved IOU report in paid policy that doesn't have any receipt
Verify Add receipt placeholder is not shown

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Go to FAB > Pay someone > Enter amount > Select user > Submit
Open the paid IOU request > Verify Add receipt placeholder is not shown
Open any paid or approved IOU report in paid policy that doesn't have any receipt
Verify Add receipt placeholder is not shown

QA Steps

Go to FAB > Pay someone > Enter amount > Select user > Submit
Open the paid IOU request > Verify Add receipt placeholder is not shown
Open any paid or approved IOU report in paid policy that doesn't have any receipt
Verify Add receipt placeholder is not shown

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

android_native.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

android_chrome.mp4

iOS: Native

ios_native.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios_safari.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web_chrome.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

desktop_app.mp4

…ot allowed when paying someone. Signed-off-by: Krishna Gupta <belivethatkg@gmail.com>

melvin-bot · 2024-05-04T05:17:33Z

@sobitneupane 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]

Krishna2323 · 2024-05-04T16:42:30Z

@JmillsExpensify, I made changes to hide the add receipt placeholder when the IOU is approved or settled. I believe this is the expected behavior, am I correct?

JmillsExpensify · 2024-05-04T17:03:50Z

@JmillsExpensify, I made changes to hide the add receipt placeholder when the IOU is approved or settled. I believe this is the expected behavior, am I correct?

Yes, that's correct. Thanks for confirming!

sobitneupane · 2024-05-07T09:16:39Z

@Krishna2323 We are showing 'Review Required' in those reports which are not in paid policy (for example: one-to-one chat). I belive we should not show it.

Screen.Recording.2024-05-07.at.14.59.54.mov

sobitneupane

Screenshots/Videos

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-05-07.at.15.02.22.mov

Krishna2323 · 2024-05-09T14:02:58Z

Sorry for delay, will be updating this today or tomorrow for sure.

Signed-off-by: Krishna Gupta <belivethatkg@gmail.com>

Krishna2323 · 2024-05-10T06:03:17Z

@Krishna2323 We are showing 'Review Required' in those reports which are not in paid policy (for example: one-to-one chat). I belive we should not show it.

@sobitneupane, updated.

sobitneupane · 2024-05-13T08:41:36Z

src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestView.tsx

@@ -328,15 +330,16 @@ function MoneyRequestView({
    );

    const shouldShowMapOrReceipt = showMapAsImage || hasReceipt;
-    const shouldShowReceiptEmptyState = !hasReceipt && !isInvoice && (canEditReceipt || isAdmin || isApprover);
+    const isReceiptAllowed = !isPayReport && !isInvoice;
+    const shouldShowReceiptEmptyState = isReceiptAllowed && !hasReceipt && !isApproved && !isSettled && (canEditReceipt || isAdmin || isApprover);


@Krishna2323 I believe we should show Receipt Header and Empty state only for paid polices as we are doing the same in shouldShowNotesViolations else it will be quite confusing.

@sobitneupane, sorry for delay, I think the empty state should be shown for unpaid policy but Receipt Header should be hidden.

@Krishna2323 Can the receipt be edited by the other user(in P2P IOU) or admin in unpaid policy? If yes, we should leave the show empty state?

Bump @Krishna2323

@sobitneupane, the receipt can't be edited/added by other user(in P2P IOU) or admin in unpaid policy.

In that case, I don't think we should show empty state as we are going to use it to allow user to add receipt. To be fair, the thumbnail represents Add Receipt not Empty Receipt.

agree with that, I will update the code if required and test accordingly today.

@sobitneupane, code is updated.

sobitneupane · 2024-05-13T08:46:27Z

src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestView.tsx

    const noticeTypeViolations = transactionViolations?.filter((violation) => violation.type === 'notice').map((v) => ViolationsUtils.getViolationTranslation(v, translate)) ?? [];
    const shouldShowNotesViolations = !isReceiptBeingScanned && canUseViolations && ReportUtils.isPaidGroupPolicy(report);

    return (
        <View style={[StyleUtils.getReportWelcomeContainerStyle(isSmallScreenWidth, true, shouldShowAnimatedBackground)]}>
            {shouldShowAnimatedBackground && <AnimatedEmptyStateBackground />}
            <View style={shouldShowAnimatedBackground && [StyleUtils.getReportWelcomeTopMarginStyle(isSmallScreenWidth, true)]}>
-                {!isInvoice && (
+                {isReceiptAllowed && (


We should show Receipt Audit Header only if the receipt is present of if we are showing receipt empty state. I reckon there will be the cases where isReceiptAllowed is true but there is no receipt or receipt empty state. Example case: Once the request without receipt is approved. What's your thought?

I agree on hiding the header, updating and pushing the code in few minutes.

Signed-off-by: Krishna Gupta <belivethatkg@gmail.com>

sobitneupane

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 either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
- 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 UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design 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

MariaHCD

One small suggestion. There's also a lint error which should be fixed by merging main.

MariaHCD · 2024-05-28T09:22:13Z

src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestView.tsx

@@ -129,6 +130,7 @@ function MoneyRequestView({
    const cardProgramName = isCardTransaction && transactionCardID !== undefined ? CardUtils.getCardDescription(transactionCardID) : '';
    const isApproved = ReportUtils.isReportApproved(moneyRequestReport);
    const isInvoice = ReportUtils.isInvoiceReport(moneyRequestReport);
+    const isPayReport = ReportActionsUtils.isPayAction(parentReportAction);


Suggested change

const isPayReport = ReportActionsUtils.isPayAction(parentReportAction);

const isPaidReport = ReportActionsUtils.isPayAction(parentReportAction);

Updated to isPaidReport and merged main.

Signed-off-by: Krishna Gupta <belivethatkg@gmail.com>

MariaHCD

Nice, thanks! We've got one more merge conflict

Signed-off-by: Krishna Gupta <belivethatkg@gmail.com>

Krishna2323 · 2024-05-29T18:12:21Z

@MariaHCD, conflict resolved.

MariaHCD

Got some more conflicts 😬

Signed-off-by: Krishna Gupta <belivethatkg@gmail.com>

Krishna2323 · 2024-05-30T23:46:52Z

@MariaHCD, conflict resolved 😅

OSBotify · 2024-05-31T06:31:59Z

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

luacmartins · 2024-06-04T23:17:21Z

FYI this PR caused this minor regression. @Krishna2323 @sobitneupane could you please take a look?

OSBotify · 2024-06-06T12:33:40Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 1.4.79-11 🚀

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

getusha · 2024-06-28T19:40:48Z

This caused this minor regression #43076 where Receipt label doesn't appear for p2p expenses due to the condition.

fix: Pay someone - Add receipt placeholder is shown when receipt is n…

1ffb954

…ot allowed when paying someone. Signed-off-by: Krishna Gupta <belivethatkg@gmail.com>

Krishna2323 requested a review from a team as a code owner May 4, 2024 05:17

melvin-bot bot requested review from sobitneupane and removed request for a team May 4, 2024 05:17

sobitneupane reviewed May 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

Krishna2323 added 2 commits May 10, 2024 10:59

Merge branch 'Expensify:main' into krishna2323/issue/41489

4a19ebe

fix: show notice violation RBR only for paid policy.

f080274

Signed-off-by: Krishna Gupta <belivethatkg@gmail.com>

sobitneupane reviewed May 13, 2024

View reviewed changes

Krishna2323 added 4 commits May 17, 2024 12:28

Merge branch 'Expensify:main' into krishna2323/issue/41489

2685299

hide receipt header if no receipt or empty state is present.

503cfb9

Signed-off-by: Krishna Gupta <belivethatkg@gmail.com>

Merge branch 'Expensify:main' into krishna2323/issue/41489

7e2e29c

hide empty receipt placeholder when it can't be edited in unpaid policy.

d865727

Signed-off-by: Krishna Gupta <belivethatkg@gmail.com>

sobitneupane approved these changes May 28, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from MariaHCD May 28, 2024 08:27

MariaHCD requested changes May 28, 2024

View reviewed changes

Krishna2323 added 2 commits May 28, 2024 19:02

Merge branch 'Expensify:main' into krishna2323/issue/41489

10b6fa9

const name update.

467295e

Signed-off-by: Krishna Gupta <belivethatkg@gmail.com>

MariaHCD reviewed May 29, 2024

View reviewed changes

Krishna2323 added 2 commits May 29, 2024 23:39

fix conflicts.

922daca

Signed-off-by: Krishna Gupta <belivethatkg@gmail.com>

Merge branch 'main' into krishna2323/issue/41489

8808273

MariaHCD reviewed May 30, 2024

View reviewed changes

Krishna2323 added 2 commits May 31, 2024 05:11

resolve merge conflicts.

71feb6b

Signed-off-by: Krishna Gupta <belivethatkg@gmail.com>

Merge branch 'main' into krishna2323/issue/41489

e167f90

fix merge conflicts.

fa50929

Signed-off-by: Krishna Gupta <belivethatkg@gmail.com>

MariaHCD approved these changes May 31, 2024

View reviewed changes

MariaHCD merged commit 25c5438 into Expensify:main May 31, 2024
15 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Jun 4, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-06-04 #43037

Closed

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Jun 6, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-06-13] [$250] Pay someone - Add receipt placeholder is shown when receipt is not allowed when paying someone #41489

Closed

getusha mentioned this pull request Jun 28, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-07-10] [HOLD for payment 2024-07-02] [$125] Expense - "Receipt" label does not appear above receipt placeholder for p2p expense #43076

Closed

6 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

fix: Pay someone - Add receipt placeholder is shown when receipt is not allowed when paying someone #41635

fix: Pay someone - Add receipt placeholder is shown when receipt is not allowed when paying someone #41635

Krishna2323 commented May 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

melvin-bot bot commented May 4, 2024

Krishna2323 commented May 4, 2024

JmillsExpensify commented May 4, 2024

sobitneupane commented May 7, 2024

sobitneupane left a comment

Krishna2323 commented May 9, 2024

Krishna2323 commented May 10, 2024

sobitneupane May 13, 2024

Krishna2323 May 17, 2024

sobitneupane May 19, 2024

sobitneupane May 21, 2024

Krishna2323 May 22, 2024

Krishna2323 May 22, 2024

sobitneupane May 22, 2024

Krishna2323 May 24, 2024

Krishna2323 May 24, 2024

sobitneupane May 13, 2024

Krishna2323 May 17, 2024

Krishna2323 May 17, 2024

sobitneupane left a comment

MariaHCD left a comment

MariaHCD May 28, 2024

Krishna2323 May 28, 2024

MariaHCD left a comment

Krishna2323 commented May 29, 2024

MariaHCD left a comment

Krishna2323 commented May 30, 2024

OSBotify commented May 31, 2024

luacmartins commented Jun 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

OSBotify commented Jun 6, 2024

getusha commented Jun 28, 2024

	const isPayReport = ReportActionsUtils.isPayAction(parentReportAction);
	const isPaidReport = ReportActionsUtils.isPayAction(parentReportAction);

fix: Pay someone - Add receipt placeholder is shown when receipt is not allowed when paying someone #41635

fix: Pay someone - Add receipt placeholder is shown when receipt is not allowed when paying someone #41635

Conversation

Krishna2323 commented May 4, 2024 • edited Loading

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented May 4, 2024

Krishna2323 commented May 4, 2024

JmillsExpensify commented May 4, 2024

sobitneupane commented May 7, 2024

sobitneupane left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Screenshots/Videos

Krishna2323 commented May 9, 2024

Krishna2323 commented May 10, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sobitneupane left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

MariaHCD left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

MariaHCD left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Krishna2323 commented May 29, 2024

MariaHCD left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Krishna2323 commented May 30, 2024

OSBotify commented May 31, 2024

luacmartins commented Jun 4, 2024 • edited Loading

OSBotify commented Jun 6, 2024

getusha commented Jun 28, 2024

Krishna2323 commented May 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

luacmartins commented Jun 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading