[Details Revamp] Remove the Three Dot Menu on Affected Reports

[cdOut]

Details

This is a final PR for the Details Revamp task which aims at removing the Three Dot Menu from reports affected by the revamp. It also fixes a bug regarding the Hold promoted action not displaying properly for single expenses.

Fixed Issues

$ #42080
PROPOSAL:

Tests

1. Create a workspace
2. Go into a room of said workspace and confirm that the three dot menu in the header is missing
3. Create two expenses for the workspace
4. Go into the report view containing both those expenses and confirm the three dot menu is missing
5. Go into one of the expenses and confirm that the three dot menu is missing
6. If you have an access to an account with a Concierge guide assigned, please check whether the button for Book a call works properly, since it has been removed from the three dot menu in that chat.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

• 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

ANDROID-CHROME.mov

iOS: Native

IOS-NATIVE.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

IOS-SAFARI.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

CHROME.mov

MacOS: Desktop

DESKTOP.mov

[cdOut]

@grgia Similarily to how we discovered Tasks, when removing the Three Dot Menus from affected reports, I've noticed a Three Dot Menu Item that appears only for the Concierge chat and only when you have a Guide assigned, which is the Start a call button. The logic for this is handled in the HeaderView.tsx file which handled how the Three Dot Menu should be displayed for Groups and Rooms Reports, which should be removed in this PR.

Should we also refactor this into a button appearing in the RHP, in a similar way we handled the Tasks Mark as incomplete button? Or are we okay with leaving this one case in the Three Button Menu?

[cdOut]

cc: @grgia

[grgia]

@cdOut great catch, looks like a yes. (slack thread for ref)

[melvin-bot]

@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]

[trjExpensify]

@parasharrajat from here, please give this a review now. Thanks!

[parasharrajat]

BUG: I don't see Book a call button on details page.

Dev	Staging

[parasharrajat]

Why did we remove this menu? It shows information about held transactions when users open one.

[cdOut]

Good catch, I've readded it.

[parasharrajat]

@cdOut Have we moved all the options related functionality to the details page?

[parasharrajat]

@cdOut Ok great. Then It will be better to add these changes to that PR and remain focused on the main issue. Currently, the Hold/Unhold button functionality has issues as I mentioned above which will be solved when that PR is created. I am happy to review that PR too.

Anyways, I believe these changes are unrelated to the current issue we are solving in this PR.

What do you say @trjExpensify?

[trjExpensify]

Yep, works for me! *Tom Rhys Jones * *Expensify*

…

On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 at 19:35, Rajat ***@***.***> wrote: @cdOut <https://github.com/cdOut> Ok great. Then It will be better to add these changes to that PR and remain focused on the main issue. Currently, the Hold/Unhold button functionality has issues as I mentioned above which will be solved when that PR is created. I am happy to review that PR too. Anyways, I believe these changes are unrelated to the current issue we are solving in this PR. What do you say @trjExpensify <https://github.com/trjExpensify>? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#44025 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AD3246IWJNM4RSGMSVLBD33ZKWIXBAVCNFSM6AAAAABJSQRYSSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDEMBZGQ2DIMJSGQ> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[parasharrajat]

Over to you @cdOut.

[cdOut]

Agreed, I'll move those over there.

[cdOut]

@parasharrajat I've reverted those two commits regarding the hold fix, I'll move it to the other issue.

[parasharrajat]

This also needs to be reverted c1abbb7 (#44025)

[cdOut]

This was a change made because this check was added into MoneyRequestHeader and MoneyReportHeader logic for holds, and since the promoted action hold uses ReportUtils I also added it here for consistency. I would advise against reverting it here.

[grgia]

@cdOut do you happen to know the background for why?

[cdOut]

@grgia On main there was the possiblity to hold expenses which were already closed and it was not handled, hence why the !isClosedReport(moneyRequestReport) was added.

Again, this was added during one of the merges with main but in the MoneyReportHeader and MoneyRequestHeader which are removed here in favor of the promoted actions which use ReportUtils. For consistency's sake and not removing this fix from the flow of the app I would not revert this one.

@parasharrajat Let me know what you think.

[grgia]

For consistency's sake and not removing this fix from the flow of the app I would not revert this one.

#44656 cc @NikkiWines

If we keep this check, shouldn't we update all of the canHoldOrUnholdRequest declarations (I see 3, ReportUtils, MoneyRequestHeader, MoneyReportHeader) to include this?

[grgia]

@parasharrajat

[grgia]

Oh NVM it's early, probably not the MoneyRequestHeader. So yeah this LGTM

[cdOut]

I've reverted it just in case and I'll include this change in the PR fixing hold logic, should be good to merge.

cc: @grgia @parasharrajat

[grgia]

@cdOut @parasharrajat let me know when this is ready for a final test build

[parasharrajat]

Just one commit needs to be reverted and we are good here.

[parasharrajat]

@grgia Ready for your review.

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, Desktop, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/android/44025/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/ios/44025/index.html
Desktop 💻	Web 🕸️
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/desktop/44025/NewExpensify.dmg	https://44025.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[grgia]

LGTM, tests well!

[OSBotify]

✋ 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]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/grgia in version: 9.0.5-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/grgia in version: 9.0.5-2 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 9.0.5-13 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 9.0.6-8 🚀

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