Create new API command: ConnectBankAccountManually

[Gonals]

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/226849

Tests

1. Log into your account in NewDot. If you don't have a workspace, create one.
2. Go to Settings>Workspace>Connect Bank Account:

3. Select "Connect Manually"
4. Enter a valid routing/account number
5. You should be taken to the next step.
6. Repeat Up to step 4, but enter the same number in both fields. An error should show up:

7. Repeat 1-3 and go offline. The button should get disabled:

8. Go back online and repeat steps 1-2
9. Select Connect with Plaid and follow the steps to connect your Chase bank account via Plaid.
10. After the process is completed, you'll be taken back to the Connect Manually flow (Chase is a special case).
11. Enter the WRONG bank account number. You should see an error:

12. Enter the right one. You should move forwards to the next step.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Review Checklist

Contributor (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 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 included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • iOS / native
  • Android / native
  • iOS / Safari
  • Android / Chrome
  • MacOS / Chrome
  • 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 was added in all src/languages/* files
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and approved by marketing by tagging the marketing team 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
• 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 */
  • Any functional components have the displayName property
  • 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 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 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.
• I have checked off every checkbox in the PR author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

PR Reviewer Checklist

The Contributor+ will copy/paste it into a new comment and complete it after the author checklist is completed

• 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 verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
  • iOS / native
  • Android / native
  • iOS / Safari
  • Android / Chrome
  • MacOS / Chrome
  • 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 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 was added in all src/languages/* files
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and approved by marketing by tagging the marketing team 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 */
  • Any functional components have the displayName property
  • 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 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 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.
• I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

QA Steps

Same as tests. It'd be nice to ping someone with a Chase account that can test the Chase part.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Screenshots

Web

Mobile Web

Desktop

iOS

Android

[Gonals]

OFF WIP and ready for review!

[tylerkaraszewski]

I left a few comments. They're mostly just about my lack of understanding rather than requests to change anything.

[tylerkaraszewski]

Forgive me for asking "dumb" onyx questions, but I don't work in this code very much.

In what cases would onyxMethod and key be different for optimisticData, successData and failureData? It seems like these would always be the same? Maybe a failure would clear out an existing key?

[Gonals]

At least in most cases, they'll be the same, but sometimes a failure could also modify a _DRAFT key. I don't think I've seen any cases where the methods differ, but maybe a failure could clear out a key in certain cases (although, in most cases, it'll just clean up the content of the key)

[tylerkaraszewski]

In what cases is this not blank?

[Gonals]

I'm waiting on the PR for the automated flow (this is the manual one) to fully implement this. For Chase bank accounts, we need to ask people to enter the info manually afterwards (through this flow). In those cases, we'll pass the info we got from the automated flow in this parameter, so we can check the manually entered one is correct. It is basically a corner-ish case.

[Gonals]

Comments addressed!

[MariaHCD]

You've got a couple linter errors

[Gonals]

Comments readdressed!

[dangrous]

Updates look good and all comments addressed!

[MariaHCD]

We'll need to update this due to: #11162 (comment)

[nkuoch]

#11162 has been merged on main - please merge main on your branch

[Gonals]

OFF HOLD! Ready for review!

[MariaHCD]

LGTM! Could you also add test steps for connecting a Chase bank account with Plaid and verifying that we ask the user to enter the bank account numbers manually

[Gonals]

LGTM! Could you also add test steps for connecting a Chase bank account with Plaid and verifying that we ask the user to enter the bank account numbers manually

I Added them to the QA section! I don't have a Chase account to test them 🤷

[nkuoch]

I don't have a Chase account to test them

These are the test credentials for any Plaid banks:
username: user_good
password: pass_good

[melvin-bot]

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

[MariaHCD]

Merged without contributor+ checklist passing but all other tests succeeded.

[OSBotify]

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

[nkuoch]

write 1234 :)

…

On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 12:20 PM OSBotify ***@***.***> wrote: ✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#10987 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AASZRZ4AHHVVTIYJXJBAMTDWALC5NANCNFSM6AAAAAAQMKUON4> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by @MariaHCD in version: 1.2.8-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by @roryabraham in version: 1.2.8-0 🚀

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