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

Hide approve/pay buttons if the report contains violations #51133

Conversation

abzokhattab
Copy link
Contributor

@abzokhattab abzokhattab commented Oct 19, 2024

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #50479
PROPOSAL: #50479 (comment)

Tests

  1. Create two accounts: User A and User B.
  2. In User A, create a workspace and invite User B.
  3. Go to workspace settings > More Features and toggle on the Workflows and Rules options.
  4. Go to the workflow page and assign User B as the first approver.
  5. Create an expense report with a high amount, ensuring that it triggers a violation, then submit the report for approval.
  6. Open the expense report and verify that a violation error is displayed appropriately.
  7. In User B's account, go to the submitted expense report and ensure that the Approve button is not visible both in the report preview and the report header.

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

WhatsApp Image 2024-10-20 at 12 34 57 AM (1)

Android: mWeb Chrome

WhatsApp Image 2024-10-20 at 12 34 57 AM (2)

iOS: Native

WhatsApp Image 2024-10-20 at 12 34 57 AM (5)

iOS: mWeb Safari

WhatsApp Image 2024-10-20 at 12 34 57 AM (3)

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

WhatsApp Image 2024-10-20 at 12 34 57 AM

MacOS: Desktop

WhatsApp Image 2024-10-20 at 12 34 57 AM (4)

@abzokhattab abzokhattab requested a review from a team as a code owner October 19, 2024 22:57
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from hoangzinh October 19, 2024 22:57
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Oct 19, 2024

@hoangzinh 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 October 19, 2024 22:57
@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

hoangzinh commented Oct 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
Screen.Recording.2024-11-20.at.17.51.14.android.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2024-11-20.at.17.48.45.android.chrome.mov
iOS: Native
Screen.Recording.2024-11-20.at.17.52.55.ios.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-11-20.at.17.54.22.ios.safari.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-11-20.at.17.38.06.web.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2024-11-20.at.17.45.10.desktop.mov

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

@abzokhattab can you recheck your recordings?

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

Bug 1: App shows the "Paid" button in the step 7 of Testing steps

Screenshot 2024-10-22 at 23 00 06

@abzokhattab
Copy link
Contributor Author

@abzokhattab can you recheck your recordings?

oh sorry i needed to insert a new line for the images to render

Bug 1: App shows the "Paid" button in the step 7 of Testing steps

Should we also hide the pay button if there is a violation ?

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry for late response, I thought we won't' show pay button until an expense is approved 👀

@abzokhattab
Copy link
Contributor Author

sorry i missed your comment.

I am trying to reproduce the bug you have but i am not able to ... is there a specific step i am missing?

here is the result with another account

image

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @abzokhattab I finally found it. If you're policy owner/admin and also an approver, then instead of hide both Approve and Paid button, we only hide Approve and show Paid

Screen.Recording.2024-10-31.at.05.41.56.mov

I think it's related to this logic

!shouldBeApproved &&

@abzokhattab abzokhattab changed the title Hide approve button if report has violations Hide approve/pay buttons if the report contains violations Nov 2, 2024
@abzokhattab
Copy link
Contributor Author

Good catch!

Thank you, @hoangzinh, for identifying this issue. I’ve disabled the pay button whenever the report contains violations.

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

Bug 2: App still shows the "Approve" button in the report screen, it will hide when you go to IOU details then go back to the report screen

Screen.Recording.2024-11-04.at.06.31.21.mov

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

cc @abzokhattab on the above bug ^

@abzokhattab
Copy link
Contributor Author

i tried couple of times to reproduce the previous bug but i cannot ... i always get the submit button after submitting the report then after submission no other buttons are shown... is there a step am i missing?

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

It's not always reproducible @abzokhattab. I'm guessing because the component doesn't subscribe to Onyx allTransactionViolations, and we get allTransactionViolations in the memory of util src/libs/actions/IOU.ts. If there is a gap between the data of allTransactionViolations in the memory is not updated when component is rerender -> it still show the "Approve" btn. What do you think?

@abzokhattab
Copy link
Contributor Author

i see .. but the thing is i am not able to reproduce it so i cant tell how it could be solved, i always get the submit button after submitting the report unlike your case (the approve btn). is there a specific reproduction step i am missing?

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

It can be reproducible in native apps (specific Android).

Step to reproduce:

  1. [On Android] Sign in as an approver
  2. [On Android] Go to Workspace chat
  3. [On Web] Sign in as an employee
  4. [On Web] Submit expense with violations
  5. [On Android] Wait expense request is updated in workspace chat

Example: #51133 (comment)

@abzokhattab
Copy link
Contributor Author

following those steps i am still not able to reproduce your case.. can you please recheck that its still reproducible?

ios

Screen.Recording.2024-11-12.at.01.02.07.mov

android

Untitled.mov

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

It's weird that I can still reproduce it in both Android & IOS. Can you confirm if you're logged in as approver in Android/IOS device? Also can you take a step further by go to IOU, then fix error and verify if the Approve button is displayed? Thank you.

Screen.Recording.2024-11-12.at.17.25.22.mov

@abzokhattab
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sorry for the late response ... i had an emergency the last few days ...

Yes i am logged in as an approver ... here is the full rerproduction steps starting from creating a workspace and inviting the other user ... please let me know which step is wrong in this case:

Screen.Recording.2024-11-18.at.01.29.41.mov

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @abzokhattab can you change to "auto-submit" then in the approver device (mobile device)? And can you go to IOU page and then fix error to see if the approve button appears after resolving all errors?

@abzokhattab
Copy link
Contributor Author

I am now able to reproduce it ... i agree we should pass the violations object as a param to the can approve and pay functions..

the bug is fixed on my side after this change ... can you please double check

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

Looks good. Thanks @abzokhattab I will review today

Copy link
Contributor

@hoangzinh hoangzinh 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 Gonals November 20, 2024 10:57
Gonals
Gonals previously approved these changes Nov 20, 2024
@Gonals
Copy link
Contributor

Gonals commented Nov 20, 2024

There are some conflicts @abzokhattab

@abzokhattab
Copy link
Contributor Author

thanks @Gonals, i have just resolved the conflicts

@Gonals
Copy link
Contributor

Gonals commented Nov 22, 2024

We have conflicts again 😅

@abzokhattab
Copy link
Contributor Author

ops .. just merged again :D

src/libs/actions/IOU.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -289,7 +289,7 @@ function getAction(data: OnyxTypes.SearchResults['data'], key: string): SearchTr
const chatReportRNVP = data[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT_NAME_VALUE_PAIRS}${report?.chatReportID}`] ?? undefined;

if (
IOU.canIOUBePaid(report, chatReport, policy, allReportTransactions, false, chatReportRNVP, invoiceReceiverPolicy) &&
IOU.canIOUBePaid(report, chatReport, policy, allReportTransactions, undefined, false, chatReportRNVP, invoiceReceiverPolicy) &&
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there any util that returns transaction violations? So we can get and pass here.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We can use oynx.connect to link to the transaction violations at the top of the file. However, from a performance perspective, I thought it would be better to make it optional and use the existing one in the IOU file as a fallback.

let me know if you think we should use the oynx.connect

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No worry. I think it's fine for now. Can you do a quick test to ensure everything still good?

@Gonals Gonals merged commit 24c0770 into Expensify:main Nov 25, 2024
18 checks passed
@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/Gonals in version: 9.0.67-0 🚀

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

Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.0.67-9 🚀

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

Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/Gonals in version: 9.0.68-0 🚀

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

Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.0.68-7 🚀

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

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