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

[CP Staging] Fix: Correct Footer Display in MoneyRequestConfirmationList Component #40659

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 22, 2024

Conversation

brunovjk
Copy link
Contributor

@brunovjk brunovjk commented Apr 21, 2024

Details

Fixes footer display condition in MoneyRequestConfirmationList component to ensure correct rendering when editing

Fixed Issues

$ #39559
PROPOSAL: #39559 (comment)
$ #40709

Tests

  1. Validate Footer Display:

    1. Create a request of each IOU type (send, split, request, track-expense) using both manual, scan, and distance request types.
    2. Verify that the footer (Confirmation/Next button and formError if validation error occurs) is visible on the Confirmation Page for each request type.
    3. Ensure the footer is not visible on the Request Details Page, except for Scan SplitBill.
  2. Edit Scan SplitBill:

    1. Create a Split Bill request in Scan mode.
    2. Confirm that the footer is visible in the SplitBillDetailsPage.
    3. Ensure all fields are editable and the "confirmation button" works.
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as Tests

QA Steps

Same as Tests

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
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
MacOS: Desktop

@brunovjk brunovjk requested a review from a team as a code owner April 21, 2024 14:03
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from eh2077 and removed request for a team April 21, 2024 14:03
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Apr 21, 2024

@eh2077 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]

@brunovjk
Copy link
Contributor Author

@eh2077 PR ready for review. Thank you!

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor

eh2077 commented Apr 21, 2024

@brunovjk Can you add Screenshots/Videos?

@brunovjk
Copy link
Contributor Author

brunovjk commented Apr 21, 2024

@brunovjk Can you add Screenshots/Videos?

Sure :D give me a moment. What did you think about the Test Steps here?

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor

eh2077 commented Apr 21, 2024

@brunovjk Can you add Screenshots/Videos?

Sure :D give me a moment. What did you think about the Test Steps here?

They look good! I think you can just test all flows on web and pick up one random case to test on other platforms.

@@ -994,7 +994,7 @@ function MoneyRequestConfirmationList({
shouldShowTextInput={false}
shouldUseStyleForChildren={false}
optionHoveredStyle={canModifyParticipants ? styles.hoveredComponentBG : {}}
footerContent={!isEditingSplitBill && footerContent}
footerContent={!isReadOnly && footerContent}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

So, in the previous PR, we merged

footerContent={(!!iou?.id || isEditingSplitBill) && footerContent}

and
footerContent={!isEditingSplitBill && footerContent}

Note

isEditingSplitBill is undefined in MoneyTemporaryForRefactorRequestConfirmationList, so !isEditingSplitBill is always true

to

footerContent={!isEditingSplitBill && footerContent}

@brunovjk Can you explain why this change fixes the issue?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In the 'old' MoneyRequestConfirmationList.tsx, utilized in SplitBillDetailsPage.tsx, the footer is conditionally rendered based on isEditingSplitBill, in the Scan type you can edit. However, in MoneyTemporaryForRefactorRequestConfirmationList, as you mentioned, the footer is consistently rendered.

@eh2077 We need a new logic to approach both scenarios, I believe by utilizing isReadOnly we ensure that, what do you think? I've already tested it on the web and will upload the videos soon. My Android build is giving me troubles.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we can go further. If we just do this:

footerContent={footerContent}

Since footerContent depends on isReadOnly anyway:

const footerContent = useMemo(() => {
if (isReadOnly) {
return;
}

But I'm not sure what problems this could cause.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Cool, then I think we can go with footerContent={footerContent}

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice, let me do some testing

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor

eh2077 commented Apr 22, 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
Android: mWeb Chrome mobile-chrome
iOS: Native ios
iOS: mWeb Safari mobile-safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari web-1 web-2
MacOS: Desktop desktop-1 desktop-2

@brunovjk
Copy link
Contributor Author

@eh2077 I believe that the next Deploy Checklist will be focused soon, do you think we should/can warn about this error, before the QA team reviews the first PR?

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor

eh2077 commented Apr 22, 2024

@brunovjk Just want to confirm - only this flow Split expense => Scan receipt can be edited, right?

@brunovjk
Copy link
Contributor Author

brunovjk commented Apr 22, 2024

@brunovjk Just want to confirm - only this flow Split expense => Scan receipt can be edited, right?

As far as I know, yes.

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor

eh2077 commented Apr 22, 2024

@brunovjk Can you update tests and recordings? Please let tag me when you complete them, thanks.

Btw, you can run npx react-native start, open the App from iOS/Android and then trigger reload from terminal - to avoid rebuilding the App every time.

@brunovjk
Copy link
Contributor Author

Awesome @eh2077, Im on it.
Thank you very much for the tip.

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from tgolen April 22, 2024 16:46
@tgolen tgolen merged commit 4b0e4ee into Expensify:main Apr 22, 2024
16 checks passed
@mountiny mountiny changed the title Fix: Correct Footer Display in MoneyRequestConfirmationList Component [CP Staging] Fix: Correct Footer Display in MoneyRequestConfirmationList Component Apr 22, 2024
OSBotify pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 22, 2024
Fix: Correct Footer Display in MoneyRequestConfirmationList Component
(cherry picked from commit 4b0e4ee)
@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.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.4.64-1 🚀

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

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.4.64-1 🚀

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

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.4.64-6 🚀

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