fix: rank featured Safe Apps first on dashboard

[iamacook]

What it solves

Resolves inconsistent display of featured Safe Apps on dashboard

How this PR fixes it

We display Safe Apps on the dashboard by ranking (the amount of times an App is opened) and whether they are pinned. This does not take into account whether they are featured.

This updates the ranking of Safe Apps to put any which are featured in the initial position(s). Thereafter are only (ranked|) pinned Apps, and the "Explore" card.

How to test it

Open the dashboard on a network which has featured Safe Apps and observe featured Apps at the beginning of the list on the dashboard.

Screenshots

Checklist

• I've tested the branch on mobile 📱
• I've documented how it affects the analytics (if at all) 📊
• I've written a unit/e2e test for it (if applicable) 🧑‍💻

[github-actions]

Branch preview

✅ Deploy successful!

Website:
https://featured_dashboard_apps--walletweb.review.5afe.dev/home?safe=eth:0xA77DE01e157f9f57C7c4A326eeE9C4874D0598b6

Storybook:
https://featured_dashboard_apps--walletweb.review.5afe.dev/storybook/

[github-actions]

📦 Next.js Bundle Analysis for safe-wallet-web

This analysis was generated by the Next.js Bundle Analysis action. 🤖

Five Pages Changed Size

The following pages changed size from the code in this PR compared to its base branch:

Page	Size (compressed)	First Load
/apps	34.85 KB (🟢 -12 B)	1.03 MB
/apps/custom	32.9 KB (🟢 -12 B)	1.03 MB
/apps/open	55.24 KB (🟢 -14 B)	1.05 MB
/home	60.32 KB (🟢 -12 B)	1.06 MB
/settings/safe-apps	19.42 KB (🟢 -16 B)	1.02 MB

Details

Only the gzipped size is provided here based on an expert tip.

First Load is the size of the global bundle plus the bundle for the individual page. If a user were to show up to your website and land on a given page, the first load size represents the amount of javascript that user would need to download. If next/link is used, subsequent page loads would only need to download that page's bundle (the number in the "Size" column), since the global bundle has already been downloaded.

Any third party scripts you have added directly to your app using the <script> tag are not accounted for in this analysis

Next to the size is how much the size has increased or decreased compared with the base branch of this PR. If this percentage has increased by 20% or more, there will be a red status indicator applied, indicating that special attention should be given to this.

[github-actions]

Coverage report

St.❔	Category	Percentage	Covered / Total
🟡	Statements	73.7% (-0.01% 🔻)	14375/19505
🔴	Branches	51.08%	3419/6693
🔴	Functions	56.41% (-0.03% 🔻)	2028/3595
🟡	Lines	75.28% (-0% 🔻)	13046/17331

Show files with reduced coverage 🔻

St.❔	File	Statements	Branches	Functions	Lines
🟡	... / track-app-usage-count.ts	65.79% (-2.63% 🔻)	25%	70% (-10% 🔻)	77.42%

Test suite run success

1675 tests passing in 228 suites.

Report generated by 🧪jest coverage report action from e7e8120

[notion-workspace]

Rank featured Safe Apps frirst on dashboard

[katspaugh]

I think this kills the whole point of ranking. There are just 5 slots there and they'll be fully taken by featured apps. Where is this product requirement documented?

I would suggest showing featured apps only after pinned/most used apps to fill up the grid when the former aren't enough.

[iamacook]

I think this kills the whole point of ranking. There are just 5 slots there and they'll be fully taken by featured apps. Where is this product requirement documented?

I would suggest showing featured apps only after pinned/most used apps to fill up the grid when the former aren't enough.

For visibility, the following has since been clarified by product:

1. Feature Safe Apps
2. Pinned
3. Explore card

[katspaugh]

Now I get it. With both featured and pinned apps ranked, it still makes sense to keep the ranking.

[notion-workspace]

Change Safe App dashboard logic

[notion-workspace]

Change Safe App dashboard logic

[liliya-soroka]

Verified