Redirect user to concierge when onboarding completed #42087

skyweb331 · 2024-05-13T16:17:28Z

Details

Redirect where user was when they try to deeplink to the onboarding flow after completion

Fixed Issues

$ #40876
PROPOSAL: #40876 (comment)

Tests

Complete the onboarding steps for current login.
Try to visit onboarding url, https://dev.new.expensify.com:8082/onboarding, via deeplink or directly
Should be redirected to concierge page.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

If user already completed onboarding steps, https://staging.new.expensify.com/onboarding should be redirected to concierge page.
If not, this will not work, because onboarding completion status comes from Backend.

QA Steps

Complete the onboarding steps for current login.
Try to visit onboarding url, https://staging.new.expensify.com/onboarding, via deeplink or directly
Should be redirected to concierge page.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

android-mweb.mov

iOS: Native

IOS.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios-mweb.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

mac-chrome.mov

MacOS: Desktop

electron.mov

melvin-bot · 2024-05-13T16:17:40Z

@c3024 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]

github-actions · 2024-05-13T16:17:45Z

CLA Assistant Lite bot All contributors have signed the CLA ✍️ ✅

skyweb331 · 2024-05-13T16:19:11Z

I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA

c3024 · 2024-05-14T06:14:45Z

The modal appears and after loading is complete it disappears.

onboardindModalAppearsBriefly.mp4

Can we change this to not show the modal at all for already onboarded users?

skyweb331 · 2024-05-14T07:27:26Z

@c3024 I will look into this. BTW, this behavior depends on nvp_onboarding.hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow so if current user session still in receiving this state, modal will be visible...

To solve this,

Set nvp_onboarding.hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow as true optimistically ( as most current users are already completed onboarding), so every users will be redirected to concierge by default.
For non-completed users, once BE sends false for this value, I will redirect the user to onboarding page.

Let me know your thoughts on this.

c3024 · 2024-05-14T15:35:11Z

I agree.

We are showing the modal only after this promise is resolved here as well so it should be fine.

App/src/libs/actions/Welcome.ts

Line 33 in cba6916

isOnboardingFlowStatusKnownPromise.then(() => {

skyweb331 · 2024-05-14T18:53:22Z

@c3024 I set onboarding status completed as initial.

c3024 · 2024-05-15T09:02:32Z

src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/Navigators/OnboardingModalNavigator.tsx

@@ -45,4 +61,9 @@ function OnboardingModalNavigator() {

 OnboardingModalNavigator.displayName = 'OnboardingModalNavigator';

-export default OnboardingModalNavigator;
+export default withOnyx<OnboardingModalNavigatorProps, OnboardingModalNavigatorProps>({


useOnyx is preferred to withOnyx HOC. Could you change it?

c3024 · 2024-05-15T09:03:54Z

src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/Navigators/OnboardingModalNavigator.tsx

+        // eslint-disable-next-line react/jsx-no-useless-fragment
+        return <></>;


Suggested change

// eslint-disable-next-line react/jsx-no-useless-fragment

return <></>;

return null;

For me, when I test it on IOS and android, return null throws some errors. That's why I put Fragment. Need to test again though.

c3024 · 2024-05-15T09:07:43Z

src/types/onyx/index.ts

@@ -108,6 +109,7 @@ export type {
    MapboxAccessToken,
    Modal,
    Network,
+    Onboarding,


What is this for? I don't see this export from this file being used anywhere.

c3024 · 2024-05-15T09:16:28Z

src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/Navigators/OnboardingModalNavigator.tsx

    const styles = useThemeStyles();
    const {shouldUseNarrowLayout} = useOnboardingLayout();

+    if (hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow) {
+        Navigation.goBack();
+        Report.navigateToConciergeChat();


Suggested change

Report.navigateToConciergeChat();

I think just going back without redirecting to Concierge is better. Let me know if there are any edge cases in which redirecting to Concierge is useful.

Suppose you are in a report and clicked https://dev.new.expensify.com:8082/onboarding link in a message. In this case, if there's only goBack, it will redirect user to onboarding first and then will go back to the current report. So need to redirect user to Concierge again.

What if there's only one Concierge redirect? If so, user will be redirect to concierge on deep link click, but if he clicks go back in the browser, it will redirect user to onbarding and then onboarding will redirect user back to concierge, so user can not go back... so these two actions are required and it will remove onboarding from route history...

c3024 · 2024-05-15T11:01:26Z

src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/Navigators/OnboardingModalNavigator.tsx

+    if (hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow) {
+        Navigation.goBack();
+        Report.navigateToConciergeChat();
+        // eslint-disable-next-line react/jsx-no-useless-fragment
+        return null;
+    }


Suggested change

if (hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow) {

Navigation.goBack();

Report.navigateToConciergeChat();

// eslint-disable-next-line react/jsx-no-useless-fragment

return null;

}

useEffect(() => {

if (hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow) {

Navigation.goBack();

Report.navigateToConciergeChat();

}

}, [hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow]);

if (hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow) {

return null;

}

Is this the error you found in native apps?

ERROR Warning: Cannot update a component (ForwardRef(BaseNavigationContainer)) while rendering a different component (OnboardingModalNavigator). To locate the bad setState() call inside OnboardingModalNavigator, follow the stack trace as described in https://react.dev/link/setstate-in-render

I think this is due to using navigation while rendering. So we need to move it to a useEffect.

skyweb331 · 2024-05-15T14:23:17Z

@c3024 Thanks for your professional review. Just pushed the fixes as you guided.

c3024 · 2024-05-17T05:38:32Z

src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/Navigators/OnboardingModalNavigator.tsx

+        Navigation.goBack();
+        Report.navigateToConciergeChat();


Suggested change

Navigation.goBack();

Report.navigateToConciergeChat();

Navigation.isNavigationReady().then(() => {

Navigation.goBack();

Report.navigateToConciergeChat();

}

navigatorNotReady.mp4

I see the navigator is not ready when navigating to these routes. So, it goes back to onboarding again as seen in the video.

I thought, this component is defined in Route, so navigation should be ready already...Pushed fix as you mentioned

c3024 · 2024-05-17T06:27:02Z

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

onboardingRedirectAndroid.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

onboardingRedirectAndroidChrome.mp4

iOS: Native

onboardingRedirectiOS.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

onboardingRedirectiOSSafari.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

onboardingRedirectChrome-compressed.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

onboardingRedirectDesktop.mp4

c3024

LGTM

mountiny

This works for me, but we need to make sure all the other places in the Ap pare updated to work with removing the [] empty array style

mountiny · 2024-05-20T18:29:26Z

src/ONYXKEYS.ts

@@ -578,7 +578,7 @@ type OnyxValuesMapping = {
    [ONYXKEYS.ACCOUNT]: OnyxTypes.Account;
    [ONYXKEYS.ACCOUNT_MANAGER_REPORT_ID]: string;
    [ONYXKEYS.NVP_IS_FIRST_TIME_NEW_EXPENSIFY_USER]: boolean;
-    [ONYXKEYS.NVP_ONBOARDING]: Onboarding | [];
+    [ONYXKEYS.NVP_ONBOARDING]: Onboarding;


Why did we change the type? for old accounts the nvp is an empty array so I think we need to keep this

src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/Navigators/OnboardingModalNavigator.tsx

skyweb331 · 2024-05-28T05:20:52Z

@mountiny Done.

c3024 · 2024-05-28T10:27:44Z

@skyweb331

Please move this

    if (hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow) {
        return null;
    }

in OnboardingModalNavigator below the newly added hooks.

Hooks should not be added below null return.

Lint is failing.

There is a prettier difference as well.

Please run npm run prettier and npm run lint and fix errors (if any) every time before committing.

mountiny

Thanks!

mountiny · 2024-05-28T11:23:38Z

@skyweb331 please address the feedback whenever you can, thanks!

skyweb331 · 2024-05-28T13:38:44Z

@c3024 Sorry for wrong merging. I will run npm run prettier && npm run lint every time.

c3024 · 2024-05-28T14:48:14Z

src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/Navigators/OnboardingModalNavigator.tsx

@@ -40,10 +40,6 @@ function OnboardingModalNavigator() {
        });
    }, [hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow]);

-    if (hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow) {


This should not be removed. Otherwise there is a flash of the onboarding modal like this.

onboardModalFlash.mp4

This should just be moved below the useKeyboardShortcut hook.

skyweb331 · 2024-05-28T18:57:27Z

@c3024 Done.

mountiny

Thanks

mountiny · 2024-05-28T23:19:28Z

@c3024 can you please approve if all looks good for you. I think the comments were addressed but nowhere to rush

c3024 · 2024-05-29T05:09:28Z

src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/Navigators/OnboardingModalNavigator.tsx

+    if (!hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow) {
+        return;


Suggested change

if (!hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow) {

return;

if (hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow) {

return null;

@skyweb331

Why did you change to negation here for hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow?

Why is null omitted here? Returning undefined is not allowed for React components. You should explicitly return null.

@c3024 Done. Thanks for your great point out.

c3024

Tests well. LGTM!

onboardingChrome.mp4

mountiny

thanks

OSBotify · 2024-05-30T21:58:24Z

✋ 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 · 2024-06-06T12:34:07Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 1.4.79-11 🚀

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

hungvu193 · 2024-06-24T15:11:49Z

src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/Navigators/OnboardingModalNavigator.tsx

@@ -20,6 +24,21 @@ const Stack = createStackNavigator<OnboardingModalNavigatorParamList>();
 function OnboardingModalNavigator() {
    const styles = useThemeStyles();
    const {shouldUseNarrowLayout} = useOnboardingLayout();
+    const [hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow] = useOnyx(ONYXKEYS.NVP_ONBOARDING, {
+        selector: (onboarding) => !Array.isArray(onboarding) && (onboarding?.hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow ?? true),


This line caused this issue: #43561
More detail in this comment

You mean, empty array means onboarding completed?

Yeah, thats a mistake. When the hasCompleted property is not defined it means the onboarding was completed given its old user and we do not want to show them the flow in that case

As far as I remember, nvp_onbarding was empty array for new users in NewDot, which means, array indicates onboarding is not completed...
Is there any backend changes for this?

Hmm, it should not be an empty array for new users. That is the case only for users that had account in OldDot before

skyweb331 requested a review from a team as a code owner May 13, 2024 16:17

melvin-bot bot requested review from c3024 and removed request for a team May 13, 2024 16:17

redirect user to concierge when onboarding completed

2edff29

skyweb331 force-pushed the onboarding branch from 4535d98 to 2edff29 Compare May 13, 2024 17:24

set onboarding completed as initial

efc236a

c3024 suggested changes May 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

Skyweb331 added 2 commits May 15, 2024 05:50

remove unused onboarding onyx type

3dfb293

replace withOnyx HOC with useOnyx hook

3aa75e9

c3024 reviewed May 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

fix route change on component rendering

06706c4

c3024 reviewed May 17, 2024

View reviewed changes

navigate to concierge when navigation is ready

9fef64b

c3024 approved these changes May 17, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from mountiny May 17, 2024 09:30

mountiny assigned skyweb331 May 20, 2024

mountiny reviewed May 20, 2024

View reviewed changes

Skyweb331 added 3 commits May 22, 2024 05:32

fix comment for concerige

37aaff4

allow array for nvp_onboarding onyx

f2758fc

add comment for nvp_onboarding type

fd3dd47

skyweb331 force-pushed the onboarding branch from 950cdb2 to fd3dd47 Compare May 23, 2024 14:48

mountiny previously approved these changes May 28, 2024

View reviewed changes

fix merge error

7a4c242

skyweb331 dismissed mountiny’s stale review via 7a4c242 May 28, 2024 13:35

c3024 suggested changes May 28, 2024

View reviewed changes

fix onboarding modal flashing

e4a2d44

skyweb331 force-pushed the onboarding branch from 77fc1e2 to e4a2d44 Compare May 28, 2024 18:59

mountiny previously approved these changes May 28, 2024

View reviewed changes

c3024 suggested changes May 29, 2024

View reviewed changes

skyweb331 dismissed mountiny’s stale review via a6509c5 May 29, 2024 07:30

fix return null

2dd159d

skyweb331 force-pushed the onboarding branch from a6509c5 to 2dd159d Compare May 29, 2024 07:31

c3024 approved these changes May 29, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from mountiny May 29, 2024 10:07

mountiny approved these changes May 30, 2024

View reviewed changes

mountiny merged commit a628b89 into Expensify:main May 30, 2024
18 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Jun 4, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-06-04 #43037

Closed

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Jun 6, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-06-13] [$250] [Guided Setup] Redirect where user was when they try to deeplink to the onboarding flow after completion #40876

Closed

6 tasks

skyweb331 deleted the onboarding branch June 21, 2024 14:21

hungvu193 reviewed Jun 24, 2024

View reviewed changes

Pujan92 mentioned this pull request Jul 10, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-08-21] [$250] [FT] - Update onboarding flow to drop user into main chat screen after clicking "Get Started" on welcome video [Mobile] #45094

Closed

Pujan92 mentioned this pull request Jul 24, 2024

fix: drop user to main chat screen after onboarding #45705

Merged

50 tasks

bernhardoj mentioned this pull request Aug 2, 2024

[$250] mWeb on Chrome and mobile app experience differs on signup #46672

Closed

6 tasks

		// eslint-disable-next-line react/jsx-no-useless-fragment
		return <></>;

	// eslint-disable-next-line react/jsx-no-useless-fragment
	return <></>;
	return null;

Redirect user to concierge when onboarding completed #42087

Redirect user to concierge when onboarding completed #42087

Conversation

skyweb331 commented May 13, 2024 • edited by mountiny Loading

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented May 13, 2024

github-actions bot commented May 13, 2024 • edited Loading

skyweb331 commented May 13, 2024

c3024 commented May 14, 2024

skyweb331 commented May 14, 2024

c3024 commented May 14, 2024

skyweb331 commented May 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

skyweb331 commented May 15, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

c3024 commented May 17, 2024 • edited Loading

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

c3024 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

skyweb331 commented May 28, 2024

c3024 commented May 28, 2024

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mountiny commented May 28, 2024

skyweb331 commented May 28, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

skyweb331 commented May 28, 2024

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mountiny commented May 28, 2024

c3024 May 29, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

c3024 left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

OSBotify commented May 30, 2024

OSBotify commented Jun 6, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

skyweb331 commented May 13, 2024 •

edited by mountiny

Loading

github-actions bot commented May 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

c3024 commented May 17, 2024 •

edited

Loading

c3024 May 29, 2024 •

edited

Loading

c3024 left a comment •

edited

Loading