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

Exit to the proper page when transitioning #8204

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 17, 2022
Merged

Conversation

neil-marcellini
Copy link
Contributor

@neil-marcellini neil-marcellini commented Mar 17, 2022

cc @marcaaron

Details

As Marc suggested, subscribing to updates in the betas again ensures that componentDidMount runs.

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/201705

Tests

  1. Open an incognito window (so that there are no cookies or local data) and go to expensify.com.dev.
  2. Sign in to expensify.com.dev as a brand new userA with an @gmail.com email address.
  3. Click to open the second inbox task that says "Would you like to get started with our free plan?".
  4. Click get started.
  5. Verify and note that userA is now logged into NewDot.
  6. Close the tab, go back to expensify.com.dev and go to Settings>Policies>Group.
  7. Refresh the page.
  8. Click on the workspace policy
  9. Verify that a new tab opens in new.expensify with the workspace settings open
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Review Checklist

Contributor (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 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 included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
    • iOS / native
    • Android / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • Android / Chrome
    • MacOS / Chrome
    • 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 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 was added in all src/languages/* files
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct english and approved by marketing by tagging the marketing team on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • 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
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js) 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 */
    • Any functional components have the displayName property
    • 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
    • Any internal methods are bound to “this” properly so there are no scoping issues
    • Any internal methods bound to “this” are necessary to be bound
    • 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
  • 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(themeColors.componentBG)

PR Reviewer Checklist

  • 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 verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • iOS / native
    • Android / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • Android / Chrome
    • MacOS / Chrome
    • 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 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 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 was added in all src/languages/* files
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct english and approved by marketing by tagging the marketing team on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • 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 are not impacted by changes in this PR (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
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js) 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 */
    • Any functional components have the displayName property
    • 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
    • Any internal methods are bound to “this” properly so there are no scoping issues
    • Any internal methods bound to “this” are necessary to be bound
    • 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 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(themeColors.componentBG)

QA Steps

Same as tests but on staging.

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Screenshots

Web

Mobile Web

Desktop

iOS

Android

@neil-marcellini neil-marcellini requested a review from a team as a code owner March 17, 2022 15:57
@neil-marcellini neil-marcellini self-assigned this Mar 17, 2022
@MelvinBot MelvinBot requested review from TomatoToaster and removed request for a team March 17, 2022 15:58
Copy link
Contributor

@marcaaron marcaaron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I will accept this solution as a hotfix because it's broken on production.

However, this is not really the ideal solution because:

  1. We don't need to subscribe to the betas in this component
  2. We are only subscribing because we need this component to "update"
  3. It's a code smell and indicates we're holding something wrong or missing logic somewhere

Any ideas on what else we can do?

Also let's CP to staging so it gets out sooner than later :D

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

⚠️ ⚠️ Heads up! This pull request has the CP Staging label. ⚠️ ⚠️
Merging it will cause it to be immediately deployed to staging, even if the open StagingDeployCash deploy checklist is locked.

@neil-marcellini
Copy link
Contributor Author

Any ideas on what else we can do?

I think we could move everything into componentDidMount. If we don't need to sign out or sign in they we can exit to the route. What are all the cases where we use the transition?

    componentDidMount() {
        const accountID = parseInt(lodashGet(this.props.route.params, 'accountID', ''), 10);
        const email = lodashGet(this.props.route.params, 'email', '');
        const shortLivedToken = lodashGet(this.props.route.params, 'shortLivedToken', '');

        const isUserSignedIn = this.props.session && this.props.session.authToken;
        if (!isUserSignedIn) {
            Session.signInWithShortLivedToken(accountID, email, shortLivedToken);
            return;
        }
        if (this.signOutIfNeeded(email)) {
            return;
        }

        // exitTo is URI encoded because it could contain a variable number of slashes (i.e. "workspace/new" vs "workspace/<ID>/card")
        const exitTo = decodeURIComponent(lodashGet(this.props.route.params, 'exitTo', ''));
        if (exitTo === ROUTES.WORKSPACE_NEW) {
            // New workspace creation is handled in AuthScreens, not in its own screen
            return;
        }

        // In order to navigate to a modal, we first have to dismiss the current modal. But there is no current
        // modal you say? I know, it confuses me too. Without dismissing the current modal, if the user cancels out
        // of the workspace modal, then they will be routed back to
        // /transition/<accountID>/<email>/<authToken>/workspace/<policyID>/card and we don't want that. We want them to go back to `/`
        // and by calling dismissModal(), the /transition/... route is removed from history so the user will get taken to `/`
        // if they cancel out of the new workspace modal.
        Navigation.dismissModal();
        Navigation.navigate(exitTo);
    }

@marcaaron
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah that looks like it would work to me.

@marcaaron marcaaron merged commit 7cd7cc0 into main Mar 17, 2022
@marcaaron marcaaron deleted the neil-workspace-transition branch March 17, 2022 22:07
OSBotify pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2022
Exit to the proper page when transitioning

(cherry picked from commit 7cd7cc0)
OSBotify added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2022
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by @marcaaron in version: 1.1.44-2 🚀

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

@Expensify/applauseleads please QA this PR and check it off on the deploy checklist if it passes.

@kavimuru
Copy link

@neil-marcellini We could not test in Desktop app, Android and iOS. Web is a pass. In mWeb we are redirected app for step 6.

Image.from.iOS.MP4

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.

5 participants