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: clear anonymous user records after login #48144

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Sep 5, 2024

Conversation

dominictb
Copy link
Contributor

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #47806
PROPOSAL: #47806 (comment)

Tests

  1. Go to this link as signed out user https://dev.new.expensify.com:8082/r/7075912447943023
  2. Tap sign in
  3. Enter credentials and log in
  4. Navigate to LHN
  5. Tap fab -- start chat

Verify that there's no guest user in the contact section

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

  1. Go to this link as signed out user https://staging.new.expensify.com/r/7075912447943023
  2. Tap sign in
  3. Enter credentials and log in
  4. Navigate to LHN
  5. Tap fab -- start chat

Verify that there's no guest user in the contact section

  • 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
compressed_android.webm.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
compressed_aweb.webm.mp4
iOS: Native
compressed_ios.mp4.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
compressed_iosweb.mp4.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
compressed_web.mov.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
compressed_web.mov.mp4

@dominictb dominictb requested a review from a team as a code owner August 28, 2024 06:48
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from jjcoffee August 28, 2024 06:48
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Aug 28, 2024

@jjcoffee 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]

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team August 28, 2024 06:48
@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Aug 28, 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-app-2024-09-05_11.00.34.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
android-chrome-2024-09-05_11.20.58.mp4
iOS: Native
ios-app-2024-09-05_11.38.22.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
ios-safari-2024-09-05_11.36.09.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
desktop-chrome-2024-09-05_10.42.24.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
desktop-app-2024-09-05_10.50.27.mp4

/**
* Create Onyx update to clean up anonymous user data
*/
function buildOnyxDataToCleanUpAnonymousUser() {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we really need this if we have the anonymous session (and therefore the accountID) just before logging in?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Before this fix, there's a potential case where user:

  • Access the public room -> create anonymous record 1
  • Login then logout
  • Access the public room again -> create anonymous record 2

-> It's better to clear both records, no?

Also, I think it's a more holistic approach.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah I see your point! Just thinking though, don't we clear all Onyx data on logging out, so all those hypothetical extra anonymous records would get cleared on next log-out anyway?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@jjcoffee hmm 🤔 , I'll give it a thought and let you know.

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

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

NAB, just to make it clearer the first test step would be better as "Open any public room, e.g. ..."

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Aug 30, 2024

Hmm on this PR (and on main, but not staging) I get two guest accounts every time I open a public room:

image

Potentially caused by two OpenReport calls, one of which adds the extra guest user.

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Sep 2, 2024

@dominictb Any thoughts on this?

@dominictb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jjcoffee I didn't get this issue even with the strict mode on, but does that mean we should clear all anonymous personal details, not only the one introduced by session data, as a safe measure?

@dominictb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jjcoffee if you agree, I can revert this commit: 24f4854

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Sep 4, 2024

@dominictb Huh that's strange that it's not happening for you too! Is there any reason we can't just empty the whole personalDetails key? When we're signing in I don't think there's any expectation that the personal details should be persisted from the public room (these would be reloaded with OpenReport anyway. Maybe that's the way to go.

@dominictb
Copy link
Contributor Author

Okay, lemme revert the latest change and let you know.

@dominictb
Copy link
Contributor Author

Is there any reason we can't just empty the whole personalDetails key

this is also possible, but I prefer the safer approach, i.e: cleaning only anonymous records.

@dominictb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jjcoffee let me know what you think.

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Sep 4, 2024

@dominictb My only concern is that it could be a bit wasteful to loop through all of personalDetailsList (it could be fairly large if you visited several big public rooms, for example), if we can just empty it all at once instead.

Asking on Slack to see if anyone knows if there's a reason we don't do this 😄

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Sep 5, 2024

Okay so after a bit more testing, it looks like the duplicate OpenReport calls (and the two guest accounts appearing) only happens with strict mode enabled so we actually don't need to worry about that here. (That also explains why it doesn't happen on staging.)

I think the reason you weren't seeing the behaviour with strict mode enabled is that you have to completely clear the Onyx store before refreshing in order to get this behaviour.

I'll complete the review today, sorry for delaying it!

Copy link
Contributor

@jjcoffee jjcoffee left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from dangrous September 5, 2024 09:45
src/CONST.ts Outdated
@@ -1340,6 +1340,7 @@ const CONST = {
STUDENT_AMBASSADOR: 'studentambassadors@expensify.com',
SVFG: 'svfg@expensify.com',
EXPENSIFY_EMAIL_DOMAIN: '@expensify.com',
ANONYMOUS_USER_DOMAIN: '@expensify.anon',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
ANONYMOUS_USER_DOMAIN: '@expensify.anon',

Oops! Forgot to suggest this tidy up since we're not using this any more.

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!

Copy link
Contributor

@dangrous dangrous left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

import type Session from '@src/types/onyx/Session';
import type {AutoAuthState} from '@src/types/onyx/Session';
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

NAB - was this just a prettier / style thing?

@dangrous dangrous merged commit 64ec218 into Expensify:main Sep 5, 2024
17 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Sep 5, 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.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Sep 5, 2024

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/dangrous in version: 9.0.30-0 🚀

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.

4 participants