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

Move "View on Etherscan" to the top of the three dot menu #12345

Closed
danjm opened this issue Oct 13, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #17024
Closed

Move "View on Etherscan" to the top of the three dot menu #12345

danjm opened this issue Oct 13, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #17024
Assignees
Labels
area-UI Relating to the user interface. PS-team PS MM extension team issues
Milestone

Comments

@danjm
Copy link
Contributor

danjm commented Oct 13, 2021

Click the three dot menu icon to see this:

Screenshot from 2021-10-13 06-14-59

Move the "View on Etherscan" option to the top.

@danjm danjm added this to the UX Papercuts milestone Oct 13, 2021
@EHaracic EHaracic self-assigned this Oct 14, 2021
@dragana8 dragana8 assigned dragana8 and unassigned EHaracic Oct 15, 2021
@ghost ghost assigned ghost and dragana8 and unassigned dragana8 and ghost Oct 18, 2021
@darkwing darkwing added the area-UI Relating to the user interface. label Oct 18, 2021
@ryanml
Copy link
Contributor

ryanml commented Oct 20, 2021

Closed by: #12384

@ryanml ryanml closed this as completed Oct 20, 2021
@EHaracic EHaracic added the PS-team PS MM extension team issues label Jan 24, 2022
@seaona seaona mentioned this issue Aug 30, 2023
8 tasks
racitores added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 22, 2023
## Explanation

Currently MMI extension is assuming that all general/core MM extension
features should work under MMI but this is not been tested in the
pipeline.

This PR adds Metamask e2e tests run in the circle ci pipeline for a MMI
build generated extension. There are a set failing tests marked as
`@no-mmi` so that when running the tests with `yarn test:e2e:chrome:mmi`
will do `SELENIUM_BROWSER=chrome node test/e2e/run-all.js --mmi` passing
--mmi as param.

This is a first step to improve MMI test coverage and regression. Next
steps will be reviewed and updated tests if required

<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->

### After

<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->

## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->

## Pre-merge author checklist

- [x] I've clearly explained:
  - [x] What problem this PR is solving
  - [x] How this problem was solved
  - [ ] How reviewers can test my changes
- [ ] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [ ] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [ ] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.
DDDDDanica pushed a commit that referenced this issue Sep 22, 2023
Deleting line "The recipient's hexadecimal address is shown in the
activity list item." as the hexadecimal address is not supposed to be
shown in the activity list item unless you open the activity list item.

## Explanation

<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->

### After

<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->

## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->

## Pre-merge author checklist

- [ ] I've clearly explained:
  - [ ] What problem this PR is solving
  - [ ] How this problem was solved
  - [ ] How reviewers can test my changes
- [ ] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [ ] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [ ] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.
benjisclowder added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 25, 2023
Deleting line "The recipient's hexadecimal address is shown in the
activity list item." as the hexadecimal address is not supposed to be
shown in the activity list item unless you open the activity list item.

## Explanation

<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->

### After

<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->

## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->

## Pre-merge author checklist

- [ ] I've clearly explained:
  - [ ] What problem this PR is solving
  - [ ] How this problem was solved
  - [ ] How reviewers can test my changes
- [ ] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [ ] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [ ] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.
DDDDDanica pushed a commit that referenced this issue Sep 25, 2023
Deleting line "The recipient's hexadecimal address is shown in the
activity list item." as the hexadecimal address is not supposed to be
shown in the activity list item unless you open the activity list item,
in the next step.

## Explanation

<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->

### After

<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->

## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->

## Pre-merge author checklist

- [ ] I've clearly explained:
  - [ ] What problem this PR is solving
  - [ ] How this problem was solved
  - [ ] How reviewers can test my changes
- [ ] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [ ] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [ ] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.
DDDDDanica pushed a commit that referenced this issue Sep 25, 2023
## Deleting line "The recipient's hexadecimal address is shown in the
activity list item." as the hexadecimal address is not supposed to be
shown in the activity list item unless you open the activity list item,
in the next step.

<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->

### After

<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->

## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->

## Pre-merge author checklist

- [ ] I've clearly explained:
  - [ ] What problem this PR is solving
  - [ ] How this problem was solved
  - [ ] How reviewers can test my changes
- [ ] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [ ] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [ ] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.
mikesposito added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 26, 2023
## Explanation

With this PR the extension starts to use the `QRKeyring` provided by
`KeyringController`, instead of declaring and managing it directly in
the client.

<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

* Fixes #18776

## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->

- QR Hardware Wallets should work as before.

## Pre-merge author checklist

- [ ] I've clearly explained:
  - [ ] What problem this PR is solving
  - [ ] How this problem was solved
  - [ ] How reviewers can test my changes
- [ ] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [ ] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [ ] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.

---------

Co-authored-by: Salah <salah-eddine.saakoun@consensys.net>
Co-authored-by: MetaMask Bot <metamaskbot@users.noreply.github.com>
blackdevelopa added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 4, 2023
## Explanation

We should allow users and developers to report false positives for the
security provider warnings.

Tasks
- [x] Add option on UI to report false design. [See
deign](https://www.figma.com/file/Q69vHaA7Or7Rxz4vdzjVHC/Support-for-tx-security-providers-(MVP)?type=design&node-id=6065%3A12121&mode=design&t=oYcxRuTnTvDrzqAM-1).
The support url might change in the future.
- [x] Add new property to transactions and signature events

<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->
<img width="438" alt="Screenshot 2023-09-15 at 16 53 46"
src="https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/29962968/5c4ab365-7979-4df3-9842-77a9a906956e">


### After

<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->
<img width="434" alt="Screenshot 2023-09-21 at 11 33 07"
src="https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/29962968/774920c7-afb1-483b-8a05-c24b9bd26843">
<img width="432" alt="Screenshot 2023-09-21 at 11 33 24"
src="https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/29962968/dc890014-827b-4029-897d-b9df47edcc6f">



## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->

## Pre-merge author checklist

- [ ] I've clearly explained:
  - [x] What problem this PR is solving
  - [x] How this problem was solved
  - [x] How reviewers can test my changes
- [x] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [x] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [x] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.
garrettbear pushed a commit that referenced this issue Oct 5, 2023
## Explanation
- This PR fixes part of
#19528
- Replaces instances of `ActionableMessage` with `BannerAlert` in
`ui/pages/settings/advanced-tab/advanced-tab.component.js`
<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->

![before_success](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/46365255/624b4da9-0b59-4b83-b564-593b9c1328a8)

![before_danger](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/46365255/1549b1b7-88e9-4459-b1c1-7d39b2ddfa70)

### After

<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->

![after_success](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/46365255/41079132-ae02-48e5-afec-98b2fd22925b)

![after_danger](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/46365255/aeaad47a-9461-4942-bdd1-e9018167c6e5)

## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->
- Create build from this PR
- From Menu go to Settings -> Advanced
- Scroll Down to find **Restore user data** section.
- Try Restoring with proper/corrupted file. 
## Pre-merge author checklist

- [x] I've clearly explained:
  - [x] What problem this PR is solving
  - [x] How this problem was solved
  - [x] How reviewers can test my changes
- [ ] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [ ] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [ ] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.

---------

Co-authored-by: georgewrmarshall <george.marshall@consensys.net>
jiexi added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 18, 2023
## Explanation
Wallets shouldn't be directly concerned about the network ID as this
more of a p2p concept for gossip. What wallets really care about is
chain ID as that is the correct value to use to identify a chain, build
transactions, etc. Although these two values usually match (ignoring
hex/dec formatting), there are
[exceptions](https://medium.com/@pedrouid/chainid-vs-networkid-how-do-they-differ-on-ethereum-eec2ed41635b).

We want to remove usage of networkId and replace it with chainId where
appropriate and necessary.

This was a generally straight forward change to make, except for the
following cases:
* `networkVersion` on the `window.ethereum` provider object
* `metamaskNetworkId` on TransactionMeta objects

~~In both cases, we now use static mappings to assist in covering
chainId <-> networkId edge cases.~~ See comments in this PR for more
elaboration and the core PR linked below.

* Fixes
[mmp-1068](MetaMask/MetaMask-planning#1068)
* See: [core-1633](MetaMask/core#1633)
* See: https://github.com/MetaMask/smart-transactions-controller
<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->

### After

<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->

## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->

## Pre-merge author checklist

- [x] I've clearly explained:
  - [x] What problem this PR is solving
  - [x] How this problem was solved
  - [x] How reviewers can test my changes
- [x] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [x] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [x] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.

---------

Co-authored-by: MetaMask Bot <metamaskbot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Alex Donesky <adonesky@gmail.com>
chloeYue added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 26, 2023
## Explanation
Test scenarios for eth sign, personal sign, sign typed data, sign in
with ethereum, encrypt & decrypt message, and connecting and
disconnecting from dapp

Closes #18941
Closes #18940 
Closes #18929
<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->

### After

<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->

## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->

## Pre-merge author checklist

- [x] I've clearly explained:
  - [x] What problem this PR is solving
  - [x] How this problem was solved
  - [x] How reviewers can test my changes
- [x] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [ ] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [ ] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.

---------

Co-authored-by: Marina Boboc <120041701+benjisclowder@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Chloe Gao <chloe.gao@consensys.net>
Co-authored-by: chloeYue <105063779+chloeYue@users.noreply.github.com>
k-g-j pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 1, 2023
## Explanation

We should allow users and developers to report false positives for the
security provider warnings.

Tasks
- [x] Add option on UI to report false design. [See
deign](https://www.figma.com/file/Q69vHaA7Or7Rxz4vdzjVHC/Support-for-tx-security-providers-(MVP)?type=design&node-id=6065%3A12121&mode=design&t=oYcxRuTnTvDrzqAM-1).
The support url might change in the future.
- [x] Add new property to transactions and signature events

<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->
<img width="438" alt="Screenshot 2023-09-15 at 16 53 46"
src="https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/29962968/5c4ab365-7979-4df3-9842-77a9a906956e">


### After

<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->
<img width="434" alt="Screenshot 2023-09-21 at 11 33 07"
src="https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/29962968/774920c7-afb1-483b-8a05-c24b9bd26843">
<img width="432" alt="Screenshot 2023-09-21 at 11 33 24"
src="https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/29962968/dc890014-827b-4029-897d-b9df47edcc6f">



## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->

## Pre-merge author checklist

- [ ] I've clearly explained:
  - [x] What problem this PR is solving
  - [x] How this problem was solved
  - [x] How reviewers can test my changes
- [x] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [x] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [x] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.
k-g-j pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 1, 2023
## Explanation
- This PR fixes part of
#19528
- Replaces instances of `ActionableMessage` with `BannerAlert` in
`ui/pages/settings/advanced-tab/advanced-tab.component.js`
<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->

![before_success](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/46365255/624b4da9-0b59-4b83-b564-593b9c1328a8)

![before_danger](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/46365255/1549b1b7-88e9-4459-b1c1-7d39b2ddfa70)

### After

<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->

![after_success](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/46365255/41079132-ae02-48e5-afec-98b2fd22925b)

![after_danger](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/46365255/aeaad47a-9461-4942-bdd1-e9018167c6e5)

## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->
- Create build from this PR
- From Menu go to Settings -> Advanced
- Scroll Down to find **Restore user data** section.
- Try Restoring with proper/corrupted file. 
## Pre-merge author checklist

- [x] I've clearly explained:
  - [x] What problem this PR is solving
  - [x] How this problem was solved
  - [x] How reviewers can test my changes
- [ ] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [ ] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [ ] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.

---------

Co-authored-by: georgewrmarshall <george.marshall@consensys.net>
k-g-j pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 1, 2023
## Explanation
Wallets shouldn't be directly concerned about the network ID as this
more of a p2p concept for gossip. What wallets really care about is
chain ID as that is the correct value to use to identify a chain, build
transactions, etc. Although these two values usually match (ignoring
hex/dec formatting), there are
[exceptions](https://medium.com/@pedrouid/chainid-vs-networkid-how-do-they-differ-on-ethereum-eec2ed41635b).

We want to remove usage of networkId and replace it with chainId where
appropriate and necessary.

This was a generally straight forward change to make, except for the
following cases:
* `networkVersion` on the `window.ethereum` provider object
* `metamaskNetworkId` on TransactionMeta objects

~~In both cases, we now use static mappings to assist in covering
chainId <-> networkId edge cases.~~ See comments in this PR for more
elaboration and the core PR linked below.

* Fixes
[mmp-1068](MetaMask/MetaMask-planning#1068)
* See: [core-1633](MetaMask/core#1633)
* See: https://github.com/MetaMask/smart-transactions-controller
<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->

### After

<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->

## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->

## Pre-merge author checklist

- [x] I've clearly explained:
  - [x] What problem this PR is solving
  - [x] How this problem was solved
  - [x] How reviewers can test my changes
- [x] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [x] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [x] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.

---------

Co-authored-by: MetaMask Bot <metamaskbot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Alex Donesky <adonesky@gmail.com>
garrettbear added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 20, 2023
### Please note that `SelectButton` and `SelectOption` are WIP files but
are needed to make working with SelectWrapper possible.


## Explanation
`SelectWrapper` is the context api/data wrapper for what will be used
with `SelectButton`, `SelectOption`, and other future components. _This
component doesn't have any visual aspects to it, so anything with see
from the UI is temporary_ and will be updated in future PRs (
#20609 and
#20610 )

Fixes #20607 

- There is a lot to digest with the `SelectWrapper` component as it does
have ties to `SelectButton` and `SelectOption`. Something worth pointing
out is there is the option to have **controlled and uncontrolled for
both value and the open state**.
- Controlled open uses props `isOpen` and `onOpenChange`
- Controlled value uses props `defaultValue`, `value`, and
`onValueChange`
- The SelectWrapper is in itself a context api and has a
`useSelectContext` hook that can be utilized when creating custom
features and use controlled props. See the `SelectContextType` to
understand what may be used with this hook.


To Do / WIP Issues: _It's a bit unclear if it really makes sense to have
these at the `SelectWrapper` level._
- onBlur
- onFocus
- onChange


<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->

### After

<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->
<img width="1290" alt="Screenshot 2023-10-11 at 11 08 28 AM"
src="https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/26469696/3a60a891-53e9-49b6-bc2e-7fed8679ee07">


## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->

## Pre-merge author checklist

- [x] I've clearly explained:
  - [x] What problem this PR is solving
  - [x] How this problem was solved
  - [x] How reviewers can test my changes
- [x] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [x] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [x] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.

---------

Co-authored-by: George Marshall <george.marshall@consensys.net>
garrettbear pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jan 24, 2024
## Explanation

- This PR fixes Part of
#19528 and
#18896
- Replaces `ActionableMessage` with `BannerAlert` in
`ui/pages/confirm-add-suggested-token/confirm-add-suggested-token.js`
- Replaces old `<Button />` component (ui/components/component-library)
with new `<Button />` component
(ui/components/component-library/button/button.js) inside the
`BannerAlert` component.
<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before
**Token With Same Symbol But Different Address (Before)**

![token-with-same-symbol-but-different-address_Before](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/46365255/cf97ac7f-53e4-409e-ae35-e692a677f282)

**Token With Duplicate Contract Address (Before)**

![Same-address-different-symbol_Before](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/46365255/35291d3f-4262-44cb-a166-da2358381ba1)

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->

### After
**Token With Same Symbol But Different Address (After)**

![after_with_diff_addrs](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/46365255/97f8ed17-8880-45e2-be86-a83f86aedda5)


**Token With Duplicate Contract Address (After)**

![after_with_same_address](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/assets/46365255/f5d75432-7499-4133-bc08-136acafedc98)


<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->

## Manual Testing Steps
1. Create and Install the new build with this PR.
2. Visit and Connect the Wallet on [Test Dapp
Site](https://metamask.github.io/test-dapp/) .
3. Input token address, symbol and decimal under **_EIP 747_** section
and click **_Add Token_**.
4. Test with a token that is already added to the wallet.
   - Input same address but different token name.
   - Input different contract address and same token name.
<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->

## Pre-merge author checklist

- [x] I've clearly explained:
  - [x] What problem this PR is solving
  - [x] How this problem was solved
  - [x] How reviewers can test my changes
- [x] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [ ] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [ ] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.

---------

Co-authored-by: George Marshall <george.marshall@consensys.net>
Co-authored-by: David Walsh <davidwalsh83@gmail.com>
VGau added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 21, 2024
## Explanation

Removed Linea mainnet feature toggle and all related functions and
conditions.
<!--
Thanks for the pull request. Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?

Are there any issues, Slack conversations, Zendesk issues, user stories,
etc. reviewers should consult to understand this pull request better?
For instance:

* Fixes #12345
* See: #67890
-->

## Screenshots/Screencaps

<!-- If you're making a change to the UI, make sure to capture a
screenshot or a short video showing off your work! -->

### Before

<!-- How did the UI you changed look before your changes? Drag your
file(s) below this line: -->

### After

<!-- How does it look now? Drag your file(s) below this line: -->

## Manual Testing Steps

<!--
How should reviewers and QA manually test your changes? For instance:

- Go to this screen
- Do this
- Then do this
-->

## Pre-merge author checklist

- [X] I've clearly explained:
  - [x] What problem this PR is solving
  - [x] How this problem was solved
  - [ ] How reviewers can test my changes
- [ ] Sufficient automated test coverage has been added

## Pre-merge reviewer checklist

- [ ] Manual testing (e.g. pull and build branch, run in browser, test
code being changed)
- [ ] PR is linked to the appropriate GitHub issue
- [ ] **IF** this PR fixes a bug in the release milestone, add this PR
to the release milestone

If further QA is required (e.g. new feature, complex testing steps,
large refactor), add the `Extension QA Board` label.

In this case, a QA Engineer approval will be be required.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area-UI Relating to the user interface. PS-team PS MM extension team issues
Projects
None yet
5 participants