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 blank page on archived room with messages #13124

Conversation

hellohublot
Copy link
Contributor

@hellohublot hellohublot commented Nov 29, 2022

Details

Use ReportUtils.isArchivedRoom fix blank page on archived room

Fixed Issues

$ #12045
PROPOSAL: #12045 (comment)

Tests

  1. If you are in the development environment, first modify the Permissions.canUseDefaultRooms method
function canUseDefaultRooms(betas) {
+   return false
    return _.contains(betas, CONST.BETAS.DEFAULT_ROOMS) || canUseAllBetas(betas);
}
  1. Create a workspace
  2. Delete any assigned guides for this workspace
  3. Delete the workspace
  4. Search the admin room of this workspace
  5. Make sure the admin room of this workspace can display
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

  1. Go offline
  2. Go to settings > workspaces > Create workspace
  3. Search announce room for the newly created workspace
  4. Send a message > Pin the chat
  5. Go to settings > workspaces > delete newly created workspace
  6. Verify the announce room chat is visible

QA Steps

  1. Create a workspace
  2. Delete any assigned guides for this workspace
  3. Delete the workspace
  4. Search the admin room of this workspace
  5. Make sure the admin room of this workspace can display
  • 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:
    • iOS / native
    • Android / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • Android / Chrome
    • MacOS / Chrome
    • 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 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 was added in all src/languages/* files
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and 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 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 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(themeColors.componentBG)
  • 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.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

PR Reviewer Checklist

The reviewer will copy/paste it into a new comment and complete it after the author checklist is completed

  • 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 expected offline behavior are in the Offline steps 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 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 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:
    • iOS / native
    • Android / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • Android / Chrome
    • MacOS / Chrome
    • 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 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 was added in all src/languages/* files
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and 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
  • I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
  • 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 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(themeColors.componentBG)
  • 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.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Web

_web.mov

Mobile Web - Chrome

_mobile_chrome.mp4

Mobile Web - Safari

_mobile_safari.mp4

Desktop

_desktop.mov

iOS

_ios.mp4

Android

_android.mp4

@hellohublot hellohublot requested a review from a team as a code owner November 29, 2022 07:42
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from dangrous and thesahindia and removed request for a team November 29, 2022 07:42
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 29, 2022

@dangrous @thesahindia One of you needs to 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]

@thesahindia
Copy link
Member

So I want to reuse ReportUtils.shouldReportBeInOptionList To decide whether to display the report on the ReportScreen, if you disagree, I will resubmit the original solution ReportUtils.isArchivedRoom, Thank you 🙏

@robertjchen @dangrous, what's your opinion? Should we reuse shouldReportBeInOptionList ?

function shouldReportBeInOptionList(report, reportIDFromRoute, isInGSDMode, currentUserLogin, iouReports, betas, policies) {

@dangrous
Copy link
Contributor

Hm, interesting. Are we sure using shouldReportBeInOptionList would cover all the other scenarios currently in ReportScreen? (Other than this particular situation, that is).

@thesahindia
Copy link
Member

thesahindia commented Nov 29, 2022

Hm, interesting. Are we sure using shouldReportBeInOptionList would cover all the other scenarios currently in ReportScreen? (Other than this particular situation, that is).

Yes, I think. But we have some if statements at shouldReportBeInOptionList that are unnecessary for ReportScreen and for which we are passing some unnecessary arguments, sometimes things gets complex because of it. So I think we should not reuse shouldReportBeInOptionList

@thesahindia
Copy link
Member

Let us know what you think is best @dangrous.

@dangrous
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah I think I agree, @thesahindia - best to keep it simple. @hellohublot , if you wouldn't mind swapping back to the original solution - ReportUtils.isArchivedRoom - that would be great! Really appreciate the investigation of the other method, though.

@cead22 cead22 changed the title 12045_fix_blank_page_use_shouldReportBeInOptionList Fix blank page on archived room with messages Nov 30, 2022
cead22
cead22 previously requested changes Nov 30, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@cead22 cead22 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  • If we're going to go with this solution we should do the tests in both priority modes
  • Also, since we're modifying shouldReportBeInOptionList, should we add automated tests that cover the new cases?
  • I think the QA section should be updated since you can't modify the running code when doing QA on staging
  • In the future please write good titles for PRs explaining what its doing and capitalize the first word since it's a title

src/pages/home/ReportScreen.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@cead22
Copy link
Contributor

cead22 commented Nov 30, 2022

Yeah I think I agree, @thesahindia - best to keep it simple. @hellohublot , if you wouldn't mind swapping back to the original solution - ReportUtils.isArchivedRoom - that would be great! Really appreciate the investigation of the other method, though.

I agree

@hellohublot hellohublot force-pushed the 12045_fix_blank_page_use_shouldReportBeInOptionList branch from 58607ee to f6ca014 Compare November 30, 2022 04:28
@hellohublot
Copy link
Contributor Author

@thesahindia Hi, I have submitted my original solution and tests in this PR. Thank you very much for your suggestions.

@thesahindia
Copy link
Member

Thanks! I will test it in a few minutes.

@@ -195,10 +195,12 @@ class ReportScreen extends React.Component {
// We create policy rooms for all policies, however we don't show them unless
// - It's a free plan workspace
// - The report includes guides participants (@team.expensify.com) for 1:1 Assigned
// - It has removed all guide participants before archiving
Copy link
Member

@thesahindia thesahindia Nov 30, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we don't need a comment for this. It's making it more confusing

Suggested change
// - It has removed all guide participants before archiving

Or maybe add this

Suggested change
// - It has removed all guide participants before archiving
// - It's an archived room

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you, it has been updated

@thesahindia
Copy link
Member

thesahindia commented Nov 30, 2022

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:
    • iOS / native
    • Android / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • Android / Chrome
    • MacOS / Chrome
    • 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 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 was added in all src/languages/* files
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and 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 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(themeColors.componentBG)
  • 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.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Web
Screen.Recording.2022-11-30.at.3.53.37.PM.mov
Mobile Web - Chrome
Screen.Recording.2022-11-30.at.4.07.20.PM.mov
Mobile Web - Safari
Screen.Recording.2022-11-30.at.4.23.45.PM.mov
Desktop
Screen.Recording.2022-11-30.at.4.39.54.PM.mov
iOS
Screen.Recording.2022-11-30.at.4.28.54.PM.mov
Android
Screen.Recording.2022-11-30.at.4.11.40.PM.mov

@thesahindia
Copy link
Member

Screenshot 2022-11-30 at 4 43 57 PM

@hellohublot, please remove the first step from QA steps.

@hellohublot
Copy link
Contributor Author

@thesahindia Sure, it has been removed

@thesahindia
Copy link
Member

thesahindia commented Nov 30, 2022

@hellohublot, please also add these steps to offline steps -

  1. Go offline
  2. Go to settings > workspaces > Create workspace
  3. Search announce room for the newly created workspace
  4. Send a message > Pin the chat
  5. Go to settings > workspaces > delete newly created workspace
  6. Verify the announce room chat is visible

@hellohublot
Copy link
Contributor Author

@thesahindia Yes, it has been added

Copy link
Member

@thesahindia thesahindia left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

All yours @dangrous

Copy link
Contributor

@dangrous dangrous left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great!

@dangrous dangrous requested a review from cead22 November 30, 2022 16:56
@dangrous
Copy link
Contributor

@cead22 re-requested review from you to clear out the changes you requested (for the old version of code), so I can merge.

@thesahindia
Copy link
Member

Bump @cead22

@dangrous dangrous dismissed cead22’s stale review December 1, 2022 14:56

Changes requested on old version of code

@dangrous
Copy link
Contributor

dangrous commented Dec 1, 2022

I went ahead and dismissed the requested changes (since no longer relevant) so we can merge this

@dangrous dangrous merged commit c10d5fb into Expensify:main Dec 1, 2022
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Dec 1, 2022

✋ 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

OSBotify commented Dec 1, 2022

🚀 Deployed to staging by @dangrous in version: 1.2.35-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Dec 2, 2022

🚀 Deployed to production by @luacmartins in version: 1.2.35-0 🚀

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.

5 participants