-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.9k
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
[$500] Opens report instead of LHN on Native apps for new users when invited to a workspace #29207
Comments
Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0174b94be9389d33ad |
Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @0xmiroslav ( |
ProposalPlease re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.The onboarding process of a newly invited user - specificially to a workspace - is misaligned to the intended logic. What is the root cause of that problem?There is pre-coded logic to in Welcome.js to enforce this behaviour, it is not a result of a bug. App/src/libs/actions/Welcome.js Line 137 in ae9f83f
What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?The conditional parameter App/src/libs/actions/Welcome.js Lines 136 to 146 in ae9f83f
|
@0xmiroslav Eep! 4 days overdue now. Issues have feelings too... |
📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸 |
@0xmiroslav Still overdue 6 days?! Let's take care of this! |
This is tagged as native only issue. If that's true, the root cause should explain why issue doesn't happen on mWeb. Awaiting more proposals |
It occurs on web also would you know, so what are the next steps? Eager to submit a PR and waiting on your words. |
@miljakljajic can you provide some assistance here, been waiting for a sufficient review for two of my proposals for over 2 weeks yet your reviewer - who is assigned to both issues - has failed to follow through. I am heavily contemplating not contributing to this organisation again because of this situation, I am eager to contribute but not if there is unprofessional treatment for external contributors present. |
📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸 |
Pinging @m-natarajan as maybe they could give a response since being the author of this specific issue. |
@0xmiroslav 6 days overdue. This is scarier than being forced to listen to Vogon poetry! |
@0xmiroslav 8 days overdue is a lot. Should this be a Weekly issue? If so, feel free to change it! |
@0xmiroslav 12 days overdue. Walking. Toward. The. Light... |
📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸 |
This issue has not been updated in over 14 days. @0xmiroslav eroding to Weekly issue. |
I will not be recommending contributing to expensify to any engineers from my expierence upon three individual proposals; #29212, #29110 and this issue #29207. I have been mislead consitently par in part because of negilgent reviewers such as @0xmiroslav and poor originisational discourse on the viability of a issue - preimposed to issuing it and a contributor submitting work (@miljakljajic). I feel wasted of my time and my skills and treated horribly in this situation. I wish you the best working with air, if this proposal goes through so be it - but my opinion will not change about the organisational management of this entity. Goodday. |
📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸 |
Triggered auto assignment to @iwiznia, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details. |
@iwiznia would you mind reviewing and choose which of the proposals to go with, please? @dukenv0307 has said either @DylanDylann or @ikevin127 proposals seem most suitable. Thanks! |
@dukenv0307 This does not make sense, what inconsistency are you referring to ? Since if we don't redirect the user to the workspace report, they are just going to land on the LHN on their first login. Currently for all other cases where no navigation is called (user lands on LHN) on first login, we always show the welcome modal. I think we should do the same here, otherwise should we change BE and not send the Welcome email for this specific case ? 👀 |
I mean the inconsistency between desktop and mobile devices. Currently, if the welcome modal is shown on large screens, it will be shown on small screens too. If we add the condition to check Let's dig deeper into the reason why we shouldn't navigate to WS chat in this case. It's because on large screens we can show both LHN and chat, but on small screens, we need to choose one (in this case it's LHN), so I just wonder if we should show the welcome modal just because it's on small screens. Anyway, we need to hear the final expectation from @iwiznia |
Thanks for the explanation, indeed it makes sense to be aligned and have the Welcome modal (RHP on large screens) pop up regardless - if that's what we want to do here. This means that on large screens we see LHN + the report opened on the right side + the Welcome modal (RHP). For this we would have to remove this check: While for narrow layout devices we have 2 options:
|
ok let me see if I get this correctly.
But on small screens, we can't do that, there's no RHP, so we need to chose to either:
Is that correct? |
Not 100% sure about this, but in small screens I think we could/should do:
This both ensures you see the welcome page and that you see the workspace chat and it's the closest thing to what large screens do |
What is currently happening: Large screens:
Small screens exactly the same thing as for large screens (except you don't see the LHN on small screens, you see only the report you're navigated to). Also on small screens there's no RHP so the modal pops up from the bottom of the screen. This issue was created because the behaviour on small screens is apparently not desired. My suggestion is we should show welcome message regardless of screen size. My proposal achieved the expected result of the issue + mentioned the welcome modal consideration. |
You mean it opens in the RHP? If so, what do we show in the main pane?
I think I agree with this |
@iwiznia No, right side of LHN = main pane, not RHP. |
ok cool, we agree. To summarize what we want:
Small screens:
|
Updated proposal
cc @iwiznia |
@iwiznia I think there is conflict between the new expected behavior and this one. What do you think? |
Why you say that? From a quick look seems like that is already implemented what I said above? |
Ohhhh 🤔 you are correct and I was wrong... in this flow we are already invited to a policy, so we don't need to show the welcome card. |
Reverted proposal
Note The other proposal is not using the correct methods for implementing the proposed solution. I think a 50/50 split is fair if @DylanDylann will handle the issue using the correct logic mentioned in my proposal's solution. cc @iwiznia |
@ikevin127 Why did you say: "The other proposal is not using the correct methods for implementing the proposed solution."? |
Because |
@ikevin127 We can create a 3rd param in |
These details are missing from your proposal, but sure - no problem if you're gonna do it like that. |
Based on this comment. proposal from @DylanDylann looks good to me cc @iwiznia |
I am confused, isn't that proposal making it so that we do not navigate to the report? |
@iwiznia Yes it is, as per this issue's expected result. To recap, the options here are either of the two:
If we want to keep option 2, then this issue can be closed. |
If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!
Version Number: 1.3.80-3
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: Yes
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail:
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers):
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @c3024
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1696954351917789
Action Performed:
Expected Result:
LHN should open on the app
Actual Result:
The workspace chat opens on the app
Workaround:
Unknown
Platforms:
Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?
Screenshots/Videos
Android: Native
AndroidUnavailableWorkspace.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
AndroidUnavailableWorkspace.1.mp4
iOS: Native
rpreplay-final1696953027_Rdb3DKBX.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
iossafari_tlxmIu3D.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web_NrW4jzHh.mp4
new.user.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
desktop.1.mov
View all open jobs on GitHub
Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: