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

Fix: Onfido error and step back #11842

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Nov 1, 2022
Merged

Conversation

Uros787
Copy link
Contributor

@Uros787 Uros787 commented Oct 14, 2022

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #11461
PROPOSAL: #11461 (comment)

Tests / QA Steps

  1. Launch the app
  2. Login with the Expensify account
  3. Go to Setting - Workspace
  4. Connect Bank account
  5. Select Connect manually
  6. Put the routing number and account number
  7. Follow the flow until you hit the Onfido flow
  8. Tap the back button
  9. Error shouldn't be there and we should be on requestor step

PR Review Checklist

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 adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review 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 */
    • 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 reviewer 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 included screenshots or videos 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 adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review 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 */
    • 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.

Screenshots

Web

web-onfido-error.mov

Mobile Web - Chrome

mweb-chrome-onfido-error.mov

Mobile Web - Safari

mweb-safari-onfido-error.mov

Desktop

desktop-onfido-error.mov

iOS

ios-onfido-error.mov

Android

android-onfido-error.mov

@Uros787 Uros787 requested a review from a team as a code owner October 14, 2022 14:13
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from ctkochan22 and sobitneupane and removed request for a team October 14, 2022 14:14
@sobitneupane
Copy link
Contributor

sobitneupane commented Oct 14, 2022

I am not sure why I was requested for review. I am not assigned to the related issue.

cc: @mananjadhav

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

@Uros787 Is it working fine for you on the latest main? I am trying and I am getting an error when I click on submit on Personal Information step. Not able to move forward.

@Uros787
Copy link
Contributor Author

Uros787 commented Oct 16, 2022

@mananjadhav i just checked again, everything is passing fine

Comment on lines 190 to 191
BankAccounts.clearOnfidoToken();
BankAccounts.goToWithdrawalAccountSetupStep(CONST.BANK_ACCOUNT.STEP.REQUESTOR);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just a heads up, I've created a new component called RequestorOnfidoStep in this PR: #11719

So this logic will be moved to RequestorOnfidoStep.

Not sure which PR is going to get merged first. Perhaps you can branch off that PR?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Makes sense @MariaHCD, or we can put this on hold if you feel that the component by go under changes before getting merged?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't see my PR having too many changes before getting merged so I think we can have this on hold for a little while

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

@Uros787 Please, make sure coming forward the issues are linked as the template suggests:
$ https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/11461 otherwise assigning the correct reviewers will not work unfortunately

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

@Uros787 can you help me with the information you filled in the forms? I can't move past the Personal Details form.

@Uros787
Copy link
Contributor Author

Uros787 commented Oct 27, 2022

@mananjadhav hey, so on original issue if you follow the data that tester filled in ok the video, you can pass easily

mananjadhav
mananjadhav previously approved these changes Oct 27, 2022
Copy link
Collaborator

@mananjadhav mananjadhav left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the help here @Uros787. This is working fine. Changes are good and test well.

@MariaHCD All yours.

🎀 👀 🎀 
C+ reviewed

  • 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:
    • 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 adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review 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 */
    • 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.

Screenshots

Web

web-onfido-error.mov

Mobile Web - Chrome

mweb-chrome-onfido-error.mov

Mobile Web - Safari

mweb-safari-onfido-error.mov

Desktop

desktop-onfido-error.mov

iOS

ios-onfido-error.mov

Android

android-onfido-error.mov

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

@Uros787 this has conflicts can you please resolve them? Also it seems the checklist is not complete, I am guessing you'll have to update it from the latest template

@Uros787
Copy link
Contributor Author

Uros787 commented Oct 28, 2022

@mananjadhav hey, just fixed the conflicts
Regarding the checklist. I've pasted and double checked the list but everything is there. Not sure why it fails

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

@Uros787 I believe this item is different in the current and expected checklist.

// Required 
[ ] I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
// In your checklist, in PR body
[ ] 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.

Please update the checklist from this link

@Uros787
Copy link
Contributor Author

Uros787 commented Oct 28, 2022

@mananjadhav should be good now, pasted it from that link and went through it. Sorry to trouble you

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

No worries at all @Uros787. It still shows failed (guessing it didn't rerun after your update). @ctkochan22 can you help rerun the checklist please?

@MariaHCD
Copy link
Contributor

MariaHCD commented Oct 28, 2022

I re-ran the check, but it still failed 🤔 Perhaps just copying over the checklist again from here and re-filling would be easier :)

Screen Shot 2022-10-28 at 9 43 17 PM

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

@Uros787 did you get a chance to copy the updated checklist?

@Uros787
Copy link
Contributor Author

Uros787 commented Oct 31, 2022

@mananjadhav i've copied the checklist from the link you pasted and then went through it

I will do it again

@Uros787
Copy link
Contributor Author

Uros787 commented Oct 31, 2022

@mananjadhav @MariaHCD updated

@mananjadhav
Copy link
Collaborator

mananjadhav commented Oct 31, 2022

@Uros787 This looks like it passed now.

@ctkochan22 @MariaHCD All yours.

Copy link
Contributor

@MariaHCD MariaHCD left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, just one clarification

USER_TAPPED_BACK: 'User exited by clicking the back button.',
USER_EXITED: 'User exited by manual action.',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just to confirm, is this the error message returned by the Onfido SDK?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That is correct

@MariaHCD MariaHCD merged commit 78d322f into Expensify:main Nov 1, 2022
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot added the Emergency label Nov 1, 2022
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 1, 2022

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Nov 1, 2022

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

@MariaHCD MariaHCD removed the Emergency label Nov 1, 2022
@MariaHCD
Copy link
Contributor

MariaHCD commented Nov 1, 2022

Not an emergency. The PR reviewer checklist was completed. Re-ran the check and it passed here.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Nov 2, 2022

🚀 Deployed to staging by @MariaHCD in version: 1.2.23-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Nov 4, 2022

🚀 Deployed to production by @Julesssss in version: 1.2.23-9 🚀

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants