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

[CP Staging] Stop showing receipt images for cash requests #25800

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Aug 23, 2023

Conversation

marcaaron
Copy link
Contributor

@marcaaron marcaaron commented Aug 23, 2023

Details

Figured out the root cause after discussing with @luacmartins and @mountiny

Fixed Issues

$ #25795

Tests

  1. Log in to User A's account.
  2. Open User B's chat.
  3. Navigate to the "Request money" section.
  4. Enter an amount and request it.
  5. Click on the requested money for more details.
  6. Click on the description and make edits.
  7. Open another browser and log in with User B's account.
  8. Open User A's chat and click on the requested money.
  9. Verify the app does not crash
  10. Verify there are no receipt image placeholder images for transactions that do not actually have receipts.
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Same as tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

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 / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / 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 the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • 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 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
  • I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
  • 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
    • If we are not using the full Onyx data that we loaded, I've added the proper selector in order to ensure the component only re-renders when the data it is using changes
    • 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 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(themeColors.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 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.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Web

2023-08-23_12-44-59

Mobile Web - Chrome
Mobile Web - Safari

2023-08-23_13-04-41

Desktop

2023-08-23_13-06-26

iOS

2023-08-23_12-50-39

Android

Android is still building... 🥲

@marcaaron marcaaron self-assigned this Aug 23, 2023
@marcaaron marcaaron requested a review from a team as a code owner August 23, 2023 21:10
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from aldo-expensify and removed request for a team August 23, 2023 21:10
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Aug 23, 2023

@Santhosh-Sellavel @aldo-expensify One of you needs to 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]

@marcaaron marcaaron removed the request for review from Santhosh-Sellavel August 23, 2023 21:11
@aldo-expensify
Copy link
Contributor

I think this ends up showing an empty box like this:

image

It may be better to return the generic receipt image if the filename is missing, so you get something like this:

    if (!filename) {
        return {thumbnail: null, image: ReceiptGeneric};
    }

image

@aldo-expensify
Copy link
Contributor

aldo-expensify commented Aug 23, 2023

(maybe we need to send it via Pusher?).

I think you are right about this. If you log out and log back in, the receipt thumbnail is not there at all

image

I think this shows that the data received through the pusher doesn't match the data we download when we login and open the report. The receipt is just an empty {}:

image

Having said that, no idea which one is wrong: the pusher data or the data we get in the response when we load the report

But this seems like a better solution than letting the app crash.

Agreed

Comment on lines 41 to 44
// For things that don't actually have files we will show the generic receipt icon.
if (!filename) {
return {thumbnail: null, image: ReceiptGeneric};
}
Copy link
Contributor

@aldo-expensify aldo-expensify Aug 23, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this is better placed right after if (path.startsWith('blob:') || path.startsWith('file:')) {. So if the function is called with a path and no filename we still return return {thumbnail: null, image: path}; like we used to

@luacmartins
Copy link
Contributor

We were sending this update via Pusher here, but now I see that's just completely gone on main 🤔

@luacmartins
Copy link
Contributor

Gonna address that here

@marcaaron marcaaron changed the title [CP Staging] Provide safer access for filename param if it happens to be missing [CP Staging] Stop showing receipt images for cash requests Aug 23, 2023
@marcaaron marcaaron removed the request for review from Li357 August 23, 2023 21:43
@marcaaron
Copy link
Contributor Author

Updating the solution here to only return transactions that have receipt.receiptID. should also solve the issue.

@@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ function buildOptimisticTransaction(
* @returns {Boolean}
*/
function hasReceipt(transaction) {
return !_.isEmpty(lodashGet(transaction, 'receipt'));
return Boolean(lodashGet(transaction, 'receipt.receiptID'));
Copy link
Contributor

@luacmartins luacmartins Aug 23, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We don't create receiptID optimistically, so this change would prevent images from showing before we get a receiptID back from the client

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

luacmartins
luacmartins previously approved these changes Aug 23, 2023
@luacmartins
Copy link
Contributor

luacmartins commented Aug 23, 2023

Reviewer Checklist

  • 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:
    • Android / native
    • Android / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • MacOS / Chrome / Safari
    • 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 the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • 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
    • 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 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 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(themeColors.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 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.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Web
Mobile Web - Chrome
Mobile Web - Safari
Desktop
iOS
Android

Copy link
Contributor

@aldo-expensify aldo-expensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think this enough, the receipt object does have a source and the crash is still happening:

image

@@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ function buildOptimisticTransaction(
* @returns {Boolean}
*/
function hasReceipt(transaction) {
return !_.isEmpty(lodashGet(transaction, 'receipt'));
return Boolean(lodashGet(transaction, 'receipt.source'));
Copy link
Contributor

@aldo-expensify aldo-expensify Aug 23, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
return Boolean(lodashGet(transaction, 'receipt.source'));
const source = lodashGet(transaction, 'receipt.source');
return source.startsWith('blob:') || source.startsWith('file:') || Boolean(lodashGet(transaction, 'receipt.filename'));

Something like that? the invalid receipt has a source "https://staging.expensify.com/receipts/", so this function is still return true when it shouldn't

src/libs/TransactionUtils.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@marcaaron
Copy link
Contributor Author

Using the state solution now

Copy link
Contributor

@aldo-expensify aldo-expensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Tested well for me!

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.

Thanks for the fix ❤️ 🙇

@marcaaron
Copy link
Contributor Author

FWIW while testing mobile web i spotted some weird behavior related to the display names. Not sure if it is on staging yet - but seems unrelated to this PR:

2023-08-23_13-00-57

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

I think thats unrelated but worth posting in bugs I guess

Going to merge now since Carlos approved before already

@mountiny mountiny merged commit f0eeac6 into main Aug 23, 2023
14 checks passed
@mountiny mountiny deleted the marcaaron-fixFilenameBug branch August 23, 2023 23:03
@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.

OSBotify pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 23, 2023
[CP Staging] Stop showing receipt images for cash requests

(cherry picked from commit f0eeac6)
@marcaaron
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think thats unrelated but worth posting in bugs I guess

Yes unrelated to this change - but related to the flow since editing the transaction is what triggers it so maybe you are interested.

Broken on dev only AFAICT. Does not appear to be on staging yet so not a deploy blocker. Thanks!!!!

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

@marcaaron do you have reproduction steps for that screenshot there? Will be helpful 🙇

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.3.56-22 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 1.3.56-24 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.3.58-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 1.3.58-5 🚀

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.

5 participants