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

feat: add delete option to deletable report fields #36039

Merged
merged 24 commits into from
Apr 5, 2024

Conversation

allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor

@allroundexperts allroundexperts commented Feb 7, 2024

Details

This PR adds the ability to delete a report field attached to a report, given it was removed from a policy.

Fixed Issues

$ #35331
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

  1. Login to Old dot and create a paid policy.
  2. Select the workspace and go to settings.
  3. Enable workspace chat by executing the following commands in the console:
var p = Policy.getActive();
p.policy.isPolicyExpenseChatEnabled = true;
p.save();
  1. Click on Reports option in the LHN and create some report fields.
  2. Login to New dot using the same account.
  3. Open the workspace chat and request some money.
  4. Open the created expense report.
  5. Make sure to have the policyReportFields beta turned on in the code.
  6. Set the values for the report fields.
  7. On Old dot, delete one of the report field.
  8. In New dot, click on the same field in the expense report and verify that three dot menu shows up in the RHN.
  9. Click the three dot menu and verify that an option to delete the field appears.
  10. Delete the field and verify it no longer shows up in the expense report.
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

  1. Login to Old dot and create a paid policy.
  2. Select the workspace and go to settings.
  3. Enable workspace chat by executing the following commands in the console:
var p = Policy.getActive();
p.policy.isPolicyExpenseChatEnabled = true;
p.save();
  1. Click on Reports option in the LHN and create some report fields.
  2. Login to New dot using the same account.
  3. Open the workspace chat and request some money.
  4. Open the created expense report.
  5. Make sure to have the policyReportFields beta turned on in the code.
  6. Set the values for the report fields.
  7. On Old dot, delete one of the report field.
  8. In New dot, click on the same field in the expense report and verify that three dot menu shows up in the RHN.
  9. Click the three dot menu and verify that an option to delete the field appears.
  10. Delete the field and verify it no longer shows up in the expense report.
  • 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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review 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 (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 form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label 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
Screen.Recording.2024-02-19.at.6.39.31.AM.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2024-02-19.at.6.38.47.AM.mov
iOS: Native
Screen.Recording.2024-02-19.at.6.36.11.AM.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-02-19.at.6.30.21.AM.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-02-19.at.6.23.01.AM.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2024-02-19.at.6.29.01.AM.mov

@allroundexperts allroundexperts marked this pull request as ready for review February 25, 2024 17:35
@allroundexperts allroundexperts requested a review from a team as a code owner February 25, 2024 17:35
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from jjcoffee and removed request for a team February 25, 2024 17:35
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 25, 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]

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Feb 27, 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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review 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 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 form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label 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-2024-03-28_11.46.32.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
android-chrome-2024-03-28_12.49.31.mp4
iOS: Native
ios-app-2024-03-28_12.35.14.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
ios-safari-2024-03-28_12.43.48.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
desktop-chrome-2024-03-28_11.24.49.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
desktop-app-2024-03-28_11.34.26.mp4

@jjcoffee

This comment was marked as resolved.

@jjcoffee

This comment was marked as resolved.

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

@allroundexperts Any thoughts on the bugs above?

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Mar 4, 2024

@allroundexperts Friendly bump! 🙇

@allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @jjcoffee!
I'm on it now.

@allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor Author

BUG? I have to navigate away from the report and back (or refresh) in order for the three-dots menu to show up after deleting the field on OD.

This would be handled from the backend. I think pusher is not sending the delete event to the ND. @thienlnam Can you check here please?

@allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor Author

allroundexperts commented Mar 4, 2024

BUG: Unexpected error while updating the field, please try again later error shows when trying to delete a field. BE error is "Invalid ReportID '0' for the report store".

This seems to be on the backend as well. @thienlnam can you verify? I'm sending the field like shown here

@thienlnam
Copy link
Contributor

This would be handled from the backend. I think pusher is not sending the delete event to the ND. @thienlnam Can you check here please?

This is known, there's another big refactor happening right now for pusher updates in the BE. This will be broken until that is finished

This seems to be on the backend as well. @thienlnam can you verify? I'm sending the field like shown here

I can take a look at this one - created an issue to look into it further https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/375261

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Mar 5, 2024

Hmm now the delete option never shows, I think because the reportFields now come through as fieldList when OpenReport is called.

@thienlnam
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah that is one change, additionally for the API call - what are the parameters being sent?

You no longer need to prefix with expensify_ since it comes that way now from the changes listed here #36170 (comment)

@thienlnam
Copy link
Contributor

We might want to move forward with the FE changes for #36170 before doing this PR

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Apr 4, 2024

@thienlnam Another one that seems most likely BE-related. When adding a new field in OD, it does come through via pusher on ND, but tapping on the field leads to Not found page.

desktop-chrome-newfield-2024-04-04_15.15.03.mp4

jjcoffee

This comment was marked as resolved.

@thienlnam
Copy link
Contributor

When adding a new field in OD, it does come through via pusher on ND, but tapping on the field leads to Not found page.

Hmm, if the data is stored correctly in the policy onyx key - then I would imagine this would be a FE issue

@allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor Author

@allroundexperts The tick next to the selected option is gone (again? 😄). Other than that testing well and code looks good!

image

Added the check icon @jjcoffee

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Apr 5, 2024

Hmm, if the data is stored correctly in the policy onyx key - then I would imagine this would be a FE issue

@thienlnam Just double-checked it's also happening on main. It looks like there's no pusher event to update the report's fieldList, which is why it's showing a not found page. I think we can handle it in a follow-up.

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Apr 5, 2024

@allroundexperts Sorry, there are conflicts now, can you fix? 😄

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Apr 5, 2024

Ah looks like the PR with the conflicts was reverted. New PR is in draft #39711. I have asked there if they can HOLD for our PR to get merged first (I think that makes the most sense here!).

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 thienlnam April 5, 2024 13:14
@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Apr 5, 2024

Damn just noticed the perf test is failing. Can you merge main @allroundexperts?

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Apr 5, 2024

Conflicting PR won't block us, we're good to merge this once the perf test passes @thienlnam 🙇

Copy link
Contributor

@thienlnam thienlnam left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is unrelated to the perf tests, and it seems like we're going to merge them anyways https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1712343373389919

@thienlnam thienlnam merged commit d3c60f6 into Expensify:main Apr 5, 2024
15 of 16 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Apr 8, 2024

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.4.61-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Apr 8, 2024

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.4.61-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 1.4.61-8 🚀

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

fieldName={Str.UCFirst(reportField.name)}
fieldKey={fieldKey}
fieldValue={fieldValue}
isRequired={!reportField.deletable}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should have made sure that the report title field is always required. #42525

@@ -73,44 +84,78 @@ function EditReportFieldPage({route, policy, report}: EditReportFieldPageProps)
Navigation.dismissModal(report?.reportID);
};

const handleReportFieldDelete = () => {
ReportActions.deleteReportField(report.reportID, reportField);
Navigation.dismissModal(report?.reportID);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Before we call Navigation.dismissModal here, we should set isDeleteModalVisible to false to prevent the delay in closing the delete modal #43496

);
const menuItems: ThreeDotsMenuItem[] = [];

const isReportFieldDeletable = reportField.deletable && !isReportFieldTitle;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

isReportFieldTitle checks for formula also and the tile field can be text as well. So, we need to check if fieldID is title. More details here #49077

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.

8 participants