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

fix: Distance rates - Enabled distance rate changes to Disabled after deleting it. #48859

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor

@Krishna2323 Krishna2323 commented Sep 10, 2024

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #48290
PROPOSAL: #48290 (comment)

Tests

  • Precondition: Workspace has enabled categories, tags & taxes.
  1. Go offline
  2. Go to workspace categories page
  3. Delete an enable category
  4. Verify the category is disabled after being deleted offline
  5. Go to workspace taxes page
  6. Delete an enable tax rate
  7. Verify the tax rate is disabled after being deleted offline
  8. Go to workspace tags page
  9. Delete an enable tag
  10. Verify the tagis disabled after being deleted offline
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

  1. Go offline
  2. Go to workspace categories page
  3. Delete an enable category
  4. Verify the category is disabled after being deleted offline
  5. Go to workspace taxes page
  6. Delete an enable tax rate
  7. Verify the tax rate is disabled after being deleted offline
  8. Go to workspace tags page
  9. Delete an enable tag
  10. Verify the tagis disabled after being deleted offline

QA Steps

  1. Go offline
  2. Go to workspace categories page
  3. Delete an enable category
  4. Verify the category is disabled after being deleted offline
  5. Go to workspace taxes page
  6. Delete an enable tax rate
  7. Verify the tax rate is disabled after being deleted offline
  8. Go to workspace tags page
  9. Delete an enable tag
  10. Verify the tagis disabled after being deleted offline
  • 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 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_native.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
android_chrome.mp4
iOS: Native
ios_native.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
ios_safari.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web_chrome.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
desktop_app.mp4

@Krishna2323 Krishna2323 requested a review from a team as a code owner September 10, 2024 04:57
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from paultsimura and removed request for a team September 10, 2024 04:57
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Sep 10, 2024

@paultsimura 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]

@Krishna2323 Krishna2323 marked this pull request as draft September 10, 2024 04:57
@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor Author

will be working on the other issue today.

@paultsimura
Copy link
Contributor

@Krishna2323 any updates on the PR?

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor Author

@paultsimura, sorry for the delay. I will provide an update today for sure.

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor Author

Krishna2323 commented Sep 20, 2024

@paultsimura, I haven't find the solution for the other issue yet but here is the reason why #48290 (comment) is happening.

  • The correct policy isn't returned from here, this only happens for some policy afaik.
    const allPolicies: OnyxCollection<Policy> = {};
    Onyx.connect({
    key: ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.POLICY,
    callback: (value, key) => {
    if (!key) {
    return;
    }
    if (value === null || value === undefined) {
    // If we are deleting a policy, we have to check every report linked to that policy
    // and unset the draft indicator (pencil icon) alongside removing any draft comments. Clearing these values will keep the newly archived chats from being displayed in the LHN.
    // More info: https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/14260
    const policyID = key.replace(ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.POLICY, '');
    const policyReports = ReportUtils.getAllPolicyReports(policyID);
    const cleanUpMergeQueries: Record<`${typeof ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${string}`, NullishDeep<Report>> = {};
    const cleanUpSetQueries: Record<`${typeof ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT_DRAFT_COMMENT}${string}` | `${typeof ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT_ACTIONS_DRAFTS}${string}`, null> = {};
    policyReports.forEach((policyReport) => {
    if (!policyReport) {
    return;
    }
    const {reportID} = policyReport;
    cleanUpSetQueries[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT_DRAFT_COMMENT}${reportID}`] = null;
    cleanUpSetQueries[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT_ACTIONS_DRAFTS}${reportID}`] = null;
    });
    Onyx.mergeCollection(ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT, cleanUpMergeQueries);
    Onyx.multiSet(cleanUpSetQueries);
    delete allPolicies[key];
    return;
    }
    allPolicies[key] = value;
    },
    });
  • Accessing defaultValue from reportField causes error since the policy is empty so the report field is also empty.
    const previousFieldList = allPolicies?.[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.POLICY}${policyID}`]?.fieldList ?? {};
    const reportFieldKey = ReportUtils.getReportFieldKey(reportFieldID);
    const reportField = previousFieldList[reportFieldKey];
    const updatedReportField = cloneDeep(reportField);
    valueIndexes
    .sort((a, b) => b - a)
    .forEach((valueIndex) => {
    const shouldResetDefaultValue = reportField.defaultValue === reportField.values[valueIndex];

Please let me know if you know anything about this, I'm trying to find a solution.

@paultsimura
Copy link
Contributor

@Krishna2323 thanks for looking into this. This looks like an Onyx bug, I'll report it now.

@paultsimura
Copy link
Contributor

@Krishna2323 I think we are good to try again. Let's focus on the "enabled/disabled" change.

As a temp solution for the report fields issue:

If a super quick fix is necessary for this, you can add reuseConnection: false to this Onyx.connect options temporarily, it will disable the connection reuse and it should work properly

The full fix should be delivered in Expensify/react-native-onyx#583

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor Author

@paultsimura, where should I add reuseConnection: false?

here?:

const connection = Onyx.connect({
key: ONYXKEYS.PERSISTED_REQUESTS,
// We exceptionally opt out of reusing the connection here to avoid extra callback calls due to
// an existing connection already made in PersistedRequests.ts.
reuseConnection: false,

@paultsimura
Copy link
Contributor

@Krishna2323 here:

Onyx.connect({
key: ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.POLICY,
callback: (value, key) => {
if (!key) {
return;
}
if (value === null || value === undefined) {
// If we are deleting a policy, we have to check every report linked to that policy
// and unset the draft indicator (pencil icon) alongside removing any draft comments. Clearing these values will keep the newly archived chats from being displayed in the LHN.
// More info: https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/14260
const policyID = key.replace(ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.POLICY, '');
const policyReports = ReportUtils.getAllPolicyReports(policyID);
const cleanUpMergeQueries: Record<`${typeof ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${string}`, NullishDeep<Report>> = {};
const cleanUpSetQueries: Record<`${typeof ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT_DRAFT_COMMENT}${string}` | `${typeof ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT_ACTIONS_DRAFTS}${string}`, null> = {};
policyReports.forEach((policyReport) => {
if (!policyReport) {
return;
}
const {reportID} = policyReport;
cleanUpSetQueries[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT_DRAFT_COMMENT}${reportID}`] = null;
cleanUpSetQueries[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT_ACTIONS_DRAFTS}${reportID}`] = null;
});
Onyx.mergeCollection(ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT, cleanUpMergeQueries);
Onyx.multiSet(cleanUpSetQueries);
delete allPolicies[key];
return;
}
allPolicies[key] = value;
},
});

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor Author

@paultsimura, I'm not sure if we should make the change to show feedback for optimistic data.

// We are using the offline pattern A (optimistic without feedback)
const onyxData: OnyxData = {

@paultsimura
Copy link
Contributor

paultsimura commented Sep 27, 2024

@Krishna2323 this change was only to enable testing removal of the "Report Field" list values, as we have to change the "enabled/disabled" behavior there as well. No need to commit the reuseConnection: false change.

Moreover, the Onyx PR was merged, so you can just use the Onyx v2.0.71 locally.

Please finish the author checklist and tag me when ready for review.

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor Author

Krishna2323 commented Sep 27, 2024

we have to change the "enabled/disabled" behavior there as well.

Yeah, i'm asking the same, should we change that behaviour? Because the comment (// We are using the offline pattern A (optimistic without feedback)) looks like that it was implemented like that intentionally.

Do we only need to change the "enabled/disabled" behavior or we also need to change the value removal behaviour?

@paultsimura
Copy link
Contributor

Got you, I just didn't look at the referenced code properly, sorry about that.
Yes, we should implement it here as well. The PR that added that comment was fixing the case when the value would be removed completely while offline.

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes, we should implement it here as well. The #46961 that added that comment was fixing the case when the value would be removed completely while offline.

@paultsimura, sorry, but I'm still confused about which behavior we should change. Do we want to show the pending action state only when we edit a value, or do we also need to do that when we delete? I don't think we should make changes to the current behavior since it was very recently changed after discussion.

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor Author

@paultsimura, please let me know your thoughts on the comment above ^

@paultsimura
Copy link
Contributor

I'm really sorry @Krishna2323 – I was partly available last week and only now was I able to fully dive deep into the matter of the report fields. You are correct – the report fields were implemented this way intentionally because they use an array, not objects, therefore it cannot support pending actions. We should implement the changes only on:

  • tags
  • categories
  • tax rates
  • distance rates (already implemented)

I'll start with the checklist now. Please merge main and fill out the checklist from your side. Again, I apologize for the delay and the confusion.

@paultsimura
Copy link
Contributor

paultsimura commented Oct 2, 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
2024-10-02.-.15.45.-.android.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
2024-10-02.-.15.22.-.chrome.mp4
iOS: Native
2024-10-02.-.15.06.-.Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.-.2024-10-02.at.15.05.17.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
2024-10-02.-.15.06.-.Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.-.2024-10-02.at.14.47.50.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
2024-10-02.-.15.06.-.Screen.Recording.2024-10-02.at.14.44.39.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
2024-10-02.-.15.22.-.Screen.Recording.2024-10-02.at.14.44.39.mp4

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor Author

Will complete the checklist today.

@Krishna2323 Krishna2323 marked this pull request as ready for review October 4, 2024 03:41
@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor Author

@paultsimura, checklist completed.

Signed-off-by: krishna2323 <[email protected]>
Copy link
Contributor

@paultsimura paultsimura left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Let's use !! to cast values to true/false.

src/libs/actions/Policy/Category.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/libs/actions/Policy/Tag.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/libs/actions/TaxRate.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Signed-off-by: krishna2323 <[email protected]>
@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor Author

@paultsimura, all done.

Copy link
Contributor

@paultsimura paultsimura 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 puneetlath October 5, 2024 07:41
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.

2 participants