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

[NoQA][CP STAGING][HybridApp] Add Mobile-Expensify submodule and build HybridApp on both platforms #52629

Merged
merged 45 commits into from
Dec 11, 2024

Conversation

staszekscp
Copy link
Contributor

@staszekscp staszekscp commented Nov 15, 2024

cc: @AndrewGable @Julesssss

Explanation of Change

This PR adds Mobile-Expensify as git submodule to allow simpler setup of the HybridApp environment

The related OldDot PR: https://github.com/Expensify/Mobile-Expensify/pull/13282

Fixed Issues

$ #49845
PROPOSAL: https://swmansion.slack.com/archives/C05LX9D6E07/p1731515589222279

Tests

Run the following scripts and see if they work correctly on NewDot (or if they work the same as before):

  • npm install
  • npm run clean
  • npm run android
  • npm run ios
  • npm run ipad
  • npm run ipad-sm
  • npm run pod-install

Offline tests

QA Steps

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 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

N/A

Android: mWeb Chrome

N/A

iOS: Native

N/A

iOS: mWeb Safari

N/A

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

N/A

MacOS: Desktop

N/A

@staszekscp staszekscp changed the title [WIP][HybridApp] Add Mobile-Expensify submodule and build HybridApp on both platforms [WIP] [HybridApp] Add Mobile-Expensify submodule and build HybridApp on both platforms Nov 15, 2024
@staszekscp staszekscp force-pushed the feat/old-dot-submodule branch from 73ce9c1 to 72edef4 Compare November 18, 2024 14:24
@staszekscp staszekscp marked this pull request as ready for review November 18, 2024 16:54
@staszekscp staszekscp requested a review from a team as a code owner November 18, 2024 16:54
@staszekscp staszekscp changed the title [WIP] [HybridApp] Add Mobile-Expensify submodule and build HybridApp on both platforms [HybridApp] Add Mobile-Expensify submodule and build HybridApp on both platforms Nov 18, 2024
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from chiragsalian November 18, 2024 16:54
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 18, 2024

@chiragsalian 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]

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team November 18, 2024 16:54
"android": "./scripts/set-pusher-suffix.sh && ./scripts/run-build.sh --android",
"android-standalone": "./scripts/set-pusher-suffix.sh && ./scripts/run-build.sh --android --new-dot",
"ios": "./scripts/set-pusher-suffix.sh && ./scripts/run-build.sh --ios",
"ios-standalone": "./scripts/set-pusher-suffix.sh && ./scripts/run-build.sh --ios --new-dot",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we do isHybridApp ? ios : ios-standalone? So users don't have to choose manually? Or does run-build handle this already?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@staszekscp staszekscp Nov 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If someone has access to Mobile-Expensify, the run-build command builds HybridApp by default - for Expesnify/App contributors nothing changes, the command will build a standalone NewDot.

I added the npm run ios-standalone for HybridApp devs that would need to build the "original", greenfield version of NewDot. I consider it a bit simpler than invoking the command with some additional flags. I don't think it'll be used frequently, but I wanted to add this option for anyone that wants to do that 😄

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm just checking in here. This seems reasonable, but I want to confirm where the switch logic is for future reference before marking this thread resolved.

@staszekscp staszekscp changed the title [HybridApp] Add Mobile-Expensify submodule and build HybridApp on both platforms [NoQA] [HybridApp] Add Mobile-Expensify submodule and build HybridApp on both platforms Nov 19, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@mateuuszzzzz mateuuszzzzz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🚀

@staszekscp staszekscp marked this pull request as draft November 19, 2024 13:35
@staszekscp
Copy link
Contributor Author

Converting to draft since we've encountered some minor issues with the HybridApp build! When they're resolved I'll reopen!

@AndrewGable
Copy link
Contributor

Can we also make sure that we don't break the deploy with these changes?

@staszekscp
Copy link
Contributor Author

@AndrewGable The changes from this PR shouldn't affect the deploy (since the NewDot build logic should not be changed). Temporarily we can point to another branch on Mobile-Expensify to allow people building the HybridApp from App, but the changes from this PR will affect the deploy, because I'm adjusting a bunch of build settings to make the app work.

Nevertheless, until the deploy scripts are adjusted we can stay in the "partial" setup, and if the tests go well we can merge the PR from OD

@Julesssss
Copy link
Contributor

The *-standalone scripts are for conveniece of the "HybridApp engineers" in case they need to build NewDot, because for them the npm run ios/android scripts will build HybridApp instead.

Ah I see, thanks. I see your comment here, but one thing I'm not getting is how this check is made for the repo. Is it checking for the submodule, or read/write access?

...because for them the npm run ios/android scripts will build HybridApp instead.

@staszekscp
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Julesssss the check is pretty simple - it has basically 3 steps:

  1. Enter the Mobile-Expensify directory
  2. Check if package.json exists
  3. Check if the name field's value is mobile-expensify

I didn't want to make it overly complicated, so I went for this simple and reliable check

@Julesssss
Copy link
Contributor

I didn't want to make it overly complicated, so I went for this simple and reliable check

Thanks, that seems good to me.

@Julesssss
Copy link
Contributor

@AndrewGable @mountiny any other thoughts here? I'd love to get this merged tomorrow so we have time to resolve any issues before the holidays.

AndrewGable
AndrewGable previously approved these changes Dec 10, 2024
@Julesssss
Copy link
Contributor

ESLint errors come from untouched files. Ignoring.

Copy link
Contributor

@Julesssss Julesssss left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We have pre-tested as much as we can. We have a plan for broken deploys and will test further on main.

@Julesssss
Copy link
Contributor

Ignoring checklist, other checks are already failing.

@Julesssss Julesssss merged commit 890806d into Expensify:main Dec 11, 2024
17 of 19 checks passed
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot added the Emergency label Dec 11, 2024
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Dec 11, 2024

@Julesssss looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

@Julesssss
Copy link
Contributor

@Julesssss looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

Explained above already.

Copy link
Contributor

@mountiny mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Very excited for this, great job everyone involved!

npx react-native run-ios --simulator "iPad Pro (11-inch) (4th generation)" --mode $IOS_MODE --scheme "$SCHEME"
;;
--android)
npx react-native run-android --mode $ANDROID_MODE --appId $APP_ID --active-arch-only
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
npx react-native run-android --mode $ANDROID_MODE --appId $APP_ID --active-arch-only
npx react-native run-android --mode "$ANDROID_MODE" --appId "$APP_ID" --active-arch-only

npx react-native run-ios --simulator "iPad Pro (12.9-inch) (6th generation)" --mode $IOS_MODE --scheme "$SCHEME"
;;
--ipad-sm)
npx react-native run-ios --simulator "iPad Pro (11-inch) (4th generation)" --mode $IOS_MODE --scheme "$SCHEME"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
npx react-native run-ios --simulator "iPad Pro (11-inch) (4th generation)" --mode $IOS_MODE --scheme "$SCHEME"
npx react-native run-ios --simulator "iPad Pro (11-inch) (4th generation)" --mode "$IOS_MODE" --scheme "$SCHEME"

npx react-native run-ios --list-devices --mode $IOS_MODE --scheme "$SCHEME"
;;
--ipad)
npx react-native run-ios --simulator "iPad Pro (12.9-inch) (6th generation)" --mode $IOS_MODE --scheme "$SCHEME"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
npx react-native run-ios --simulator "iPad Pro (12.9-inch) (6th generation)" --mode $IOS_MODE --scheme "$SCHEME"
npx react-native run-ios --simulator "iPad Pro (12.9-inch) (6th generation)" --mode "$IOS_MODE" --scheme "$SCHEME"

# Check if the argument is one of the desired values
case "$BUILD" in
--ios)
npx react-native run-ios --list-devices --mode $IOS_MODE --scheme "$SCHEME"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should these be in "" as well as SCHEME? Or is there a reason its different?

Suggested change
npx react-native run-ios --list-devices --mode $IOS_MODE --scheme "$SCHEME"
npx react-native run-ios --list-devices --mode "$IOS_MODE" --scheme "$SCHEME"

Comment on lines +502 to +503
> If you'd like to modify the `Mobile-Expensify` source code, it is best that you create your own fork. Then, you can swap origin of the remote repository by executing this command:
>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we are ready to merge this, are we making the OldApp repo public too now?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Mobile-Expensify will remain private for now

@Julesssss
Copy link
Contributor

Ah shit, these comments didn't show up, they were made same time as merge. But we can still review post-merge.

@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.

@Julesssss Julesssss added the CP Staging marks PRs that have been CP'd to staging label Dec 11, 2024
@Julesssss Julesssss changed the title [NoQA] [HybridApp] Add Mobile-Expensify submodule and build HybridApp on both platforms [NoQA][CP STAGING][HybridApp] Add Mobile-Expensify submodule and build HybridApp on both platforms Dec 11, 2024
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Dec 11, 2024

npm has a package.json file and a package-lock.json file. It seems you updated one without the other, which is usually a sign of a mistake. If you are updating a package make sure that you update the version in package.json then run npm install

OSBotify pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 11, 2024
…module

[NoQA] [HybridApp] Add Mobile-Expensify submodule and build HybridApp on both platforms

(cherry picked from commit 890806d)

(CP triggered by Julesssss)
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 9.0.74-3 🚀

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

Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.0.74-8 🚀

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CP Staging marks PRs that have been CP'd to staging
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants