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

feat: update some package versions to avoid console warnings #27289

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Sep 18, 2023

Conversation

allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor

@allroundexperts allroundexperts commented Sep 12, 2023

Details

This PR fixes the console warnings which appeared because of some outdated packages.

Fixed Issues

$ #26987
PROPOSAL: #26987 (comment)

Tests

  1. Open the App.
  2. Verify that the following console warnings do not show up:
[webpack-dev-server] WARNING in ./node_modules/react-native-performance/lib/module/NativeRNPerformanceManager.js
[webpack-dev-server] WARNING in ./node_modules/react-native-svg/lib/module/ReactNativeSVG.web.js
[webpack-dev-server] WARNING in ./src/libs/actions/Device/getDeviceInfo/getBaseInfo.js
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

I think this does not need a QA.

  • 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 / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / 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 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 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 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(themeColors.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 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 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 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 author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Web
Screen.Recording.2023-09-13.at.12.37.25.AM.mov
Mobile Web - Chrome
Screen.Recording.2023-09-13.at.12.41.14.AM.mov
Mobile Web - Safari
Screen.Recording.2023-09-13.at.12.42.27.AM.mov
Desktop
Screen.Recording.2023-09-13.at.12.48.07.AM.mov
iOS
Screen.Recording.2023-09-13.at.12.44.42.AM.mov
Android Flipper wasn't connecting to android so I just posted a screenshot showing that app is running successfully. Screenshot 2023-09-13 at 12 45 26 AM

@allroundexperts allroundexperts requested a review from a team as a code owner September 12, 2023 19:57
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from parasharrajat and removed request for a team September 12, 2023 19:57
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Sep 12, 2023

@parasharrajat 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]

@parasharrajat
Copy link
Member

There is a Performance.js lib which will also need to be migrated and tested against the new version.

Thoughts on this?

@allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thoughts on this?

I think that the version upgrade should not have any impact. I ran flipper on iOS without any issues after installing this. Similarly, I wasn't able to see any related console errors as well. Do you know of any other test cases which I should validate?

@parasharrajat
Copy link
Member

parasharrajat commented Sep 12, 2023

Something is wrong, I can not run npm i. For the same reason, tests are failing here.

@allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor Author

Something is wrong, I can not run npm i. For the same reason, tests are failing here.

Hm... Let me check.

@parasharrajat
Copy link
Member

@allroundexperts any luck

@allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sorry, I got distracted with another task. I'll let you know once this is ready again.

@allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor Author

This is ready @parasharrajat

@parasharrajat
Copy link
Member

What was the issue and how did you fix it?

@allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor Author

What was the issue and how did you fix it?

Hi @parasharrajat!
The issue was that I forgot to update the react-native-performance package version which was being used as a peer dependency for another package. This caused the npm i command to fail. You can check out the change I did here.

@parasharrajat
Copy link
Member

parasharrajat commented Sep 14, 2023

Did you manually updated the lock file or with npm install?

@allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor Author

Did you manually updated the lock file or with npm install?

Manual. The specific version of react-native-performance was hard coded as a peer dependency.

@parasharrajat
Copy link
Member

When you say it was hardcoded, hardcoded where?

Lock file is generated automatically and we should not manually change it. If some package in the app is using old peer dependency, we should be upgrading that or do something to fix the peer dependency.

@allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor Author

When you say it was hardcoded, hardcoded where?

Lock file is generated automatically and we should not manually change it. If some package in the app is using old peer dependency, we should be upgrading that or do something to fix the peer dependency.

I think you are correct. The version 4.0.0 of react-native-performance was a peer dependency of react-native-onyx. Did not realise that react-native-onyx is a library we maintained.

I'll create a PR on that repository, updating the version.

@parasharrajat
Copy link
Member

Thanks. Let me know when it's ready.

@allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor Author

@allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor Author

@parasharrajat The react-native-onyx bump was merged and I incorporated it into this PR. This is ready for testing again!

@parasharrajat
Copy link
Member

parasharrajat commented Sep 15, 2023

Screenshots

🔲 iOS / native

Screen.Recording.2023-09-15.at.4.43.44.PM.mov

🔲 iOS / Safari

Screen.Recording.2023-09-15.at.4.41.07.PM.mov

🔲 MacOS / Desktop

Screen.Recording.2023-09-15.at.5.09.27.PM.mov

🔲 MacOS / Chrome

Screen.Recording.2023-09-15.at.4.37.00.PM.mov

🔲 Android / Chrome

Screen.Recording.2023-09-15.at.4.45.08.PM.mov

🔲 Android / native

Screen.Recording.2023-09-15.at.5.10.42.PM.mov

Copy link
Member

@parasharrajat parasharrajat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

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 / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / 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 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 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(themeColors.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 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.

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from marcochavezf September 15, 2023 11:42
@marcochavezf marcochavezf merged commit 225fddc into Expensify:main Sep 18, 2023
@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

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcochavezf in version: 1.3.71-0 🚀

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

Copy link
Contributor

@situchan situchan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There's Podfile.lock file diff on latest main, caused by this PR.
Can anyone please raise follow-up PR?

@parasharrajat
Copy link
Member

ah, I didn't notice. I can do that.

@parasharrajat
Copy link
Member

here we go #27681.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.3.71-12 🚀

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