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

[No QA] Add violations to inline submit #54898

Merged
merged 27 commits into from
Jan 16, 2025
Merged

Conversation

luacmartins
Copy link
Contributor

@luacmartins luacmartins commented Jan 7, 2025

Explanation of Change

Adds the missing violation logic to IOU.canSubmitReport and extracts that into a reusable function. I also tried to handle as many of the Do not default string IDs to any value. ESLint errors, but some got quite convoluted and I didn't want to distract too much from the main change, so I left them for a follow up PR.

Fixed Issues

$ #54910

Tests

  1. Create a new workspace and enable Delayed submission
  2. Submit an expense to the workspace
  3. Navigate to the Search page and verify that you see Submit as the action button
  4. Get the hash from the snapshot_ key and the transactionID from Onyx
  5. Manually update update onyx data to add brokenCardConnection violation to transaction violations. Example:
Onyx.merge('snapshot_<hash>', {
  data: {
    transactionViolations_<id>: [{
      type: 'warning',
      name: 'rter',
      data: {rterType: 'brokenCardConnection'},
    }]
  }
});
  1. Verify the action changed to View
  2. Refresh the page
  3. Verify that the Submit action is shown again (since the refresh wiped the manual data we inserted)
  4. Manually update onyx data to add an rter violation
Onyx.merge('snapshot_<has>', {
  data: {
    'transactionViolations_<id>': [{
      type: 'warning',
      name: 'rter',
      data: {rterType: 'sevenDayHold', pendingPattern: true},
    }]
  }
});
  1. Verify that you see the View action
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Regular TCs for Submit functionality

  • 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 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 used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it 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.ts 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.
  • I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
  • 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

Screen.Recording.2025-01-07.at.3.24.32.PM.mov
Android: Native
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
MacOS: Desktop

@luacmartins luacmartins self-assigned this Jan 7, 2025
@luacmartins luacmartins changed the title Add violations to inline submit [HOLD Auth 13663] Add violations to inline submit Jan 7, 2025
@luacmartins luacmartins changed the title [HOLD Auth 13663] Add violations to inline submit [HOLD Auth 13663] [No QA] Add violations to inline submit Jan 7, 2025
@luacmartins luacmartins changed the title [HOLD Auth 13663] [No QA] Add violations to inline submit [HOLD App 54847] [No QA] Add violations to inline submit Jan 9, 2025
@luacmartins luacmartins marked this pull request as ready for review January 9, 2025 18:23
@luacmartins luacmartins requested a review from a team as a code owner January 9, 2025 18:23
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from hungvu193 January 9, 2025 18:23
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 9, 2025

@hungvu193 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 January 9, 2025 18:23
@luacmartins
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hungvu193 this PR is on hold for merge because it's based on the holding PRs branch, but we can start reviewing/testing.

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

Taking a look 👀

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

hungvu193 commented Jan 12, 2025

It's working well. It looks like we have a lot of linings for the default id, are we gonna fix it?

Screen.Recording.2025-01-10.at.16.32.51.mov
Screen.Recording.2025-01-10.at.17.31.47.mov

@luacmartins
Copy link
Contributor Author

It's working well. It looks like we have a lot of linings for the default id, are we gonna fix it?

No, I wasn't planning to fix that as part of this PR since some of them are quite complex and it'd distract from the main point of the PR.

@luacmartins luacmartins changed the title [HOLD App 54847] [No QA] Add violations to inline submit [No QA] Add violations to inline submit Jan 14, 2025
@luacmartins
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hungvu193 updated! I also fixed the ESLint errors. Hopefully I didn't break anything along the way

@luacmartins luacmartins requested a review from hungvu193 January 14, 2025 16:59
@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

Hey @luacmartins What's the best way to make a violation report? 😄

@luacmartins
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hey @luacmartins What's the best way to make a violation report?

You could:

  1. Create a new workspace
  2. Submit an expense without a category selected
  3. In Workspace settings, turn on Require category
  4. The report should now have a Missing category violation on it

@luacmartins luacmartins requested a review from hungvu193 January 15, 2025 14:16
@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

Nice. I'll take a look today

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

hungvu193 commented Jan 16, 2025

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 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.ts 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.
  • For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this flow.
  • 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
Screen.Recording.2025-01-16.at.16.01.33.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2025-01-16.at.17.56.46.mov
iOS: Native
Screen.Recording.2025-01-16.at.17.24.03.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-01-16.at.17.54.34.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-01-16.at.15.25.46.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2025-01-16.at.15.35.26.mov

Copy link
Contributor

@hungvu193 hungvu193 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 cristipaval January 16, 2025 10:58
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 16, 2025

@cristipaval 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]

Copy link
Contributor

@lakchote lakchote left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. Reviewing since I have context on Search, and because Carlos had a lot of conflicts on that one.

@lakchote lakchote merged commit a2e0558 into main Jan 16, 2025
17 checks passed
@lakchote lakchote deleted the cmartins-addInlineSubmit branch January 16, 2025 16:43
@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.

Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/lakchote in version: 9.0.87-0 🚀

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

Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Beamanator in version: 9.0.87-3 🚀

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

!showRTERViolationMessage &&
!shouldShowBrokenConnectionViolation &&
(iouReport?.ownerAccountID === currentUserAccountID || isAdmin || iouReport?.managerID === currentUserAccountID);
const shouldShowSubmitButton = canSubmitReport(iouReport, policy, transactionIDList, transactionViolations);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@luacmartins Can you help me understand the logic behind using only 1st transaction to check for violations here? Since this will create weird submit behaviour on report preview and report header.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh nice catch! This was a bad refactor for the lint rules. We should be using all report transactions. Is it being fixed somewhere else already?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Cool, thanks for handling it!

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