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

integrate payment card section with API #43473

Conversation

pasyukevich
Copy link
Contributor

@pasyukevich pasyukevich commented Jun 11, 2024

Details

Prepare account for testing:

Sign up for an account on staging.expensify.com, go to Settings > Workspaces > New Workspace. Create a Collect workspace.

To access this newly created component, paste the following link into the browser

https://dev.new.expensify.com:8082/settings/subscription

or add this effect to InitialSettingsPage.tsx

useEffect(() => {
    Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.SETTINGS_SUBSCRIPTION)
}, [])

Add card data to CardSection.tsx :

import Onyx from 'react-native-onyx';

useEffect(() => {
       Onyx.merge(ONYXKEYS.FUND_LIST, [{
           accountData: {
               cardMonth: 11,
       
               cardNumber: '1234',

               cardYear: 2026,
       
               currency: 'USD',
       
               addressName: 'John Doe',
           },
           isDefault: true,
       }]) 
   }, [fundList]);

Fixed Issues

$ #38618 #38617
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  1. Login into the app with prepared account from the Detailed part
  2. Open 'Subscription' page
  3. Verify that the section is rendered correctly from the desktop and browser, "Add payment card" showed
  4. Press "Add payment card"
  5. Fill the form and submit
  6. Verify that we now have next billing date info and card data
  7. Press on three dots, click "Change payment card"
  8. Varify that "Add payment card modal showed"
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

  1. Login into the app with prepared account from the Detailed part
  2. Open 'Subscription' page
  3. Verify that the section is rendered correctly from the desktop and browser, "Add payment card" showed
  4. Press "Add payment card"
  5. Fill the form and submit
  6. Verify that we now have next billing date info and card data
  7. Press on three dots, click "Change payment card"
  8. Varify that "Add payment card modal showed"
  • 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 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 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 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.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screenshot_1718132695

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screenshot_1718132803

iOS: Native

image

iOS: mWeb Safari

image

MacOS: Chrome / Safari image
MacOS: Desktop image

@pasyukevich pasyukevich force-pushed the feature/card-billing-banner-api-integration branch from 920840f to 1601259 Compare June 11, 2024 13:00
@pasyukevich pasyukevich marked this pull request as ready for review June 11, 2024 19:08
@pasyukevich pasyukevich requested a review from a team as a code owner June 11, 2024 19:08
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from rushatgabhane and removed request for a team June 11, 2024 19:08
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jun 11, 2024

@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]

@amyevans amyevans requested review from mananjadhav and removed request for rushatgabhane June 11, 2024 20:05
* @returns - The next billing date in 'yyyy-MM-dd' format.
*/
function getNextBillingDate(initialDate: string): string {
const start = new Date(initialDate);
Copy link
Collaborator

@mananjadhav mananjadhav Jun 11, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we add some validations for dates here? My experience with date-fns is that if the date is invalid, it'll throw an error.

cc - @amyevans

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes to validation as a best practice if it's not too challenging, although the data from the BE should be pretty uniform so it'd have to be something very weird happening.

Also I mentioned this in another PR and @MrMuzyk said he might create a util, but due to timezone differences I think at least for now we should pass T00:00:00 so that the date is properly calculated (e.g. for me if my start date is 6/1/24 the next bill date should be 7/1/24, but it's currently showing 6/30/24)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated with validation and proper billing day

* @param initialDate - The initial billing date in 'yyyy-MM-dd' format.
* @returns - The next billing date in 'yyyy-MM-dd' format.
*/
function getNextBillingDate(initialDate: string): string {
Copy link
Collaborator

@mananjadhav mananjadhav Jun 11, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what do you think of this to get rid of while loop.

function getNextBillingDate(initialDate: string): string {
    const start = new Date(initialDate);
    const today = new Date();

    // Calculate the number of months difference and add one if start date is before today
    const monthsDiff = differenceInMonths(today, start);
    const nextBillingDate = addMonths(start, monthsDiff + 1);

    return format(nextBillingDate, CONST.DATE.MONTH_DAY_YEAR_FORMAT);
}

cc - @amyevans

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah if we can eliminate a loop that would be great!

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

updated

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
import {addMonths, format, isBefore} from 'date-fns';
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@amyevans Does it makes sense to add tests for this utils?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes I think that'd be good!

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

tests added

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

I see some flicker from default text to next billing date. I am not sure if it's because of the default card useEffect.

flicker-card-number.mov

@pasyukevich
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mananjadhav Yes, flickering happening because of test data

@pasyukevich
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mananjadhav @amyevans PR is ready for rereview

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

I’ll be able to review this in an hour.

start = new Date();
}

const current = new Date(start);
Copy link
Collaborator

@mananjadhav mananjadhav Jun 12, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

a little lost here, isn't current === start ? Then what's the thought of adding differenceInMonths ?

My code I had used const today = new Date().

This is what I see now. The next payment date is in the past.

image

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Problem fixed
I also found one more edge case and fixed it

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I raised one more comment.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I haven't reviewed the function logic closely but just glancing at the expected next billing dates in the test, I wanted to clarify expected behavior... the next billing date should always be the first of the next month (internal ref)

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't have the access to the link, but does that mean we don't even need the initialDate. We should always:

     startOfMonth(addMonths(today, 1))

?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes we can simplify to that, apologies for not catching it sooner!

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No worries. Better we caught this now.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@pasyukevich Can you take care of this change?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

I did the review again and except for the getNextBillingDate revised method, rest looks good to me.

let nextBillingDate = addDays(addMonths(start, monthsDiff), 1);

if (nextBillingDate.toUTCString() < today.toUTCString()) {
nextBillingDate = addMonths(nextBillingDate, 1);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this fix to always ensure that the nextBillingDate is in the future? In this case should this be

Suggested change
nextBillingDate = addMonths(nextBillingDate, 1);
nextBillingDate = addMonths(today, 1);

?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@pasyukevich pasyukevich Jun 13, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yes, but this update is not doing same as now

In this case, we will have today's as a billing date

@pasyukevich
Copy link
Contributor Author

@amyevans @mananjadhav

PR updated

amyevans
amyevans previously approved these changes Jun 14, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@amyevans amyevans left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, @mananjadhav can you do a final review/complete the checklist?

describe('getNextBillingDate', () => {
beforeAll(() => {
jest.useFakeTimers();
jest.setSystemTime(new Date(2024, 6, 5));
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

NAB, maybe we can add a comment that month is zero-indexed? It tripped me up for a sec 😄

Copy link
Contributor

@JKobrynski JKobrynski Jun 18, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done!

CC: @blimpich

Copy link
Contributor

@blimpich blimpich Jun 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Where is the comment? I think what Amy meant was something like this

Suggested change
jest.setSystemTime(new Date(2024, 6, 5));
// Month is zero indexed, so this is July 5th 2024
jest.setSystemTime(new Date(2024, 6, 5));

@amyevans
Copy link
Contributor

Requesting final review from @blimpich as well since I'm headed out on extended leave after today

@amyevans amyevans requested a review from blimpich June 14, 2024 21:40
@pasyukevich
Copy link
Contributor Author

For the next two weeks, I will be OOO

@JKobrynski will take to work on this issue

@blimpich blimpich requested a review from mananjadhav June 17, 2024 18:13
@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

Code changes are fine now. Working on the checklist.

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

mananjadhav commented Jun 19, 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 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-payment-date
Android: mWeb Chrome mweb-chrome-payment-date
iOS: Native ios-payment-date
iOS: mWeb Safari mweb-safari-payment-date
MacOS: Chrome / Safari web-payment-date-es web-payment-date-en
MacOS: Desktop desktop-payment-date-en

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

@blimpich All yours.

@narefyev91 narefyev91 mentioned this pull request Jun 19, 2024
50 tasks
Copy link
Contributor

@blimpich blimpich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code looks good to me, but I'm not able to successfully follow the QA steps. I get a bunch of errors when I try to follow the setup part of the QA to modify src/pages/settings/Subscription/CardSection/CardSection.tsx. And when I don't follow that it doesn't work.

Can we modify the QA steps to show exactly what diff should be applied to CardSection.tsx?

describe('getNextBillingDate', () => {
beforeAll(() => {
jest.useFakeTimers();
jest.setSystemTime(new Date(2024, 6, 5));
Copy link
Contributor

@blimpich blimpich Jun 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Where is the comment? I think what Amy meant was something like this

Suggested change
jest.setSystemTime(new Date(2024, 6, 5));
// Month is zero indexed, so this is July 5th 2024
jest.setSystemTime(new Date(2024, 6, 5));

@JKobrynski
Copy link
Contributor

@blimpich forgot to push 🤦 now it should be fine

@blimpich
Copy link
Contributor

I'm still not able to QA this, shouldn't a card being showing up in the drop down?

Screen.Recording.2024-06-20.at.11.55.52.AM.mov

Can we modify the QA steps to show exactly what diff should be applied to CardSection.tsx?

Still curious about this. How exactly is CardSection.tsx suppose to be updated in order to QA this?

blimpich
blimpich previously approved these changes Jun 20, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@blimpich blimpich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Finally got it to QA successfully, sorry it took me so long. I think I had a typo the first time I tried to QA and it really threw me off. Looks good, lets get the conflicts fixed and merge this 👍

@JKobrynski
Copy link
Contributor

@blimpich conflicts resolved!

@blimpich blimpich merged commit 9817d3c into Expensify:main Jun 21, 2024
18 checks passed
@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 https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.0.1-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/yuwenmemon in version: 9.0.1-19 🚀

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