Show local time in money request and 1:1 chat threads #26845

huzaifa-99 · 2023-09-06T03:31:58Z

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #24228
PROPOSAL: #24228 (comment)

Tests

Login with 2 users
Open User A's chat from User B and User B's Chat from User A.
From User A, send a message to User B. Click on the 'Reply in thread' option for that message and verify that you see User B's local time in the thread report. Do the same from User B and verify that you see User A's local time.
From User A, request money from User B. Open the money request report from both users and verify that you see User A's local time on User B's side and User B's local time on User A's side.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

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

Chrome:

Web.Chrome.mp4

Safari:

Web.Safari.mp4

Mobile Web - Chrome

mWeb.Chrome.mp4

Mobile Web - Safari

mWeb.Safari.mp4

Desktop

Desktop.Native.mp4

iOS

IOS.Native.mp4

Android

Android.Native.mp4

melvin-bot · 2023-09-06T03:32:03Z

@ArekChr Please 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]

huzaifa-99 · 2023-09-06T03:48:53Z

src/libs/ReportUtils.js

+    // Task reports `managerID` will change when assignee is changed, in that case the old `managerID` is still present in `participantAccountIDs`
+    // array along with the new one. We only need the `managerID` as a participant here.
+    if (isTaskReport(report)) {
+        finalParticipantAccountIDs = [report.managerID];
+    }


I haven't changed how local time calculation for task reports works. This is because there was some work done in #25534 a few days ago that added this behavior. But for reference, I did include the task report behavior in test videos.

Just for a recap, I originally suggested that we show User A's local time to User B and User B's local time to User A for task reports (along with other suggestions) but #25534 added the behavior that will always show the current task assignee's local time to all users who open the task report. If the assigned user themselves opens the task report they won't see the local time message.

It looks like, for showing local time in Task reports we are giving preference to assigned user instead of share destination. So if a User assigns a task to another User, and then opens the task report, they should be able to see the assigned User's local time, regardless of where they share the task.

I believe the current behavior is good but curious as to what you think.

cc: @ArekChr @roryabraham

huzaifa-99 · 2023-09-06T03:51:34Z

src/libs/ReportUtils.js

+    // In 1:1 chat threads, the participants will be the same as parent report. If a report is specifically a 1:1 chat thread then we will
+    // get parent report and use its participants array.
+    if (isThread(report) && !(isTaskReport(report) || isMoneyRequestReport(report))) {
+        const parentReport = lodashGet(allReports, [`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${report.parentReportID}`]);
+        if (hasSingleParticipant(parentReport)) {
+            finalReport = parentReport;
+        }
+    }


Recap: For 1:1 chat threads, we are not showing the local time of User B to User A, until User B replies in User A's thread.

The logic here will show the local time of User B to User A, even if they don't reply in User A's thread. Again this is in case of 1:1 chat b/w User A and User B

huzaifa-99 · 2023-09-07T00:42:48Z

Bump @ArekChr

huzaifa-99 · 2023-09-07T19:20:19Z

Bump for review @ArekChr

ArekChr · 2023-09-07T19:53:45Z

Hey @huzaifa-99 I'm ooo since Monday

huzaifa-99 · 2023-09-08T00:59:05Z

Ah Sry, I didn't know.

huzaifa-99 · 2023-09-11T08:14:51Z

I am unsure if Arkadiusz (not tagging intentionally) is back from OOO? I will tag in a day to confirm from them.

ArekChr · 2023-09-11T09:14:10Z

Hey, I'm back, reviewing

ArekChr · 2023-09-11T09:35:37Z

src/libs/ReportUtils.js

+    // Most report types will have the same initial participants
+    const initialParticipantAccountIDs = lodashGet(finalReport, 'participantAccountIDs');
+
+    // Most reports like the money request and task reports don't add the `ownerAccountId` in `participantAccountIDs`, for those types of
+    // reports we will include `ownerAccountId` in the `finalParticipantAccountIDs` array.
+    let finalParticipantAccountIDs = initialParticipantAccountIDs;
+
+    // For money requests i.e the IOU (1:1 person) and Expense (1:* person) reports, use the full `initialParticipantAccountIDs` array
+    // and add the `ownerAccountId`.
+    if (isMoneyRequestReport(report)) {
+        finalParticipantAccountIDs = _.union(initialParticipantAccountIDs, [report.ownerAccountID]);
+    }
+
+    // Task reports `managerID` will change when assignee is changed, in that case the old `managerID` is still present in `participantAccountIDs`
+    // array along with the new one. We only need the `managerID` as a participant here.
+    if (isTaskReport(report)) {
+        finalParticipantAccountIDs = [report.managerID];
+    }


For me it works, I think we could simplify this code like this.

Suggested change

// Most report types will have the same initial participants

const initialParticipantAccountIDs = lodashGet(finalReport, 'participantAccountIDs');

// Most reports like the money request and task reports don't add the `ownerAccountId` in `participantAccountIDs`, for those types of

// reports we will include `ownerAccountId` in the `finalParticipantAccountIDs` array.

let finalParticipantAccountIDs = initialParticipantAccountIDs;

// For money requests i.e the IOU (1:1 person) and Expense (1:* person) reports, use the full `initialParticipantAccountIDs` array

// and add the `ownerAccountId`.

if (isMoneyRequestReport(report)) {

finalParticipantAccountIDs = _.union(initialParticipantAccountIDs, [report.ownerAccountID]);

}

// Task reports `managerID` will change when assignee is changed, in that case the old `managerID` is still present in `participantAccountIDs`

// array along with the new one. We only need the `managerID` as a participant here.

if (isTaskReport(report)) {

finalParticipantAccountIDs = [report.managerID];

}

let finalParticipantAccountIDs = [];

if (isMoneyRequestReport(report)) {

// For money requests i.e the IOU (1:1 person) and Expense (1:* person) reports, use the full `initialParticipantAccountIDs` array

// and add the `ownerAccountId`.

finalParticipantAccountIDs = _.union(lodashGet(finalReport, 'participantAccountIDs'), [report.ownerAccountID]);

} else if (isTaskReport(report)) {

// Task reports `managerID` will change when assignee is changed, in that case the old `managerID` is still present in `participantAccountIDs`

// array along with the new one. We only need the `managerID` as a participant here.

finalParticipantAccountIDs = [report.managerID];

} else {

// Most reports like the money request and task reports don't add the `ownerAccountId` in `participantAccountIDs`, for those types of

// reports we will include `ownerAccountId` in the `finalParticipantAccountIDs` array.

finalParticipantAccountIDs = lodashGet(finalReport, 'participantAccountIDs');

}

@ArekChr Done here. I also removed a comment as it felt redundant

huzaifa-99 · 2023-09-12T11:00:26Z

Bump @ArekChr

ArekChr · 2023-09-12T11:11:02Z

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

ArekChr · 2023-09-12T11:24:07Z

@huzaifa-99 There are some cases in task thread replies, I don't see the local time of one user. Could you fix that as well?

huzaifa-99 · 2023-09-12T11:36:08Z

@ArekChr I too was of that opinion, but I left it intentionally like this. I added a note about this earlier, here.

Please lmk your thoughts on that. Thank you!

ArekChr · 2023-09-12T11:51:30Z

@huzaifa-99 Thanks for the recap, it works for me, continuing testing

ArekChr

Thanks for PR! All works

huzaifa-99 · 2023-09-13T10:51:37Z

Bump for review @roryabraham

huzaifa-99 · 2023-09-14T09:16:17Z

Gentle bump for review @roryabraham.

huzaifa-99 · 2023-09-15T10:07:53Z

Gentle bump for review @roryabraham.

huzaifa-99 · 2023-09-19T22:27:17Z

Bump for review @roryabraham

roryabraham · 2023-09-19T23:21:16Z

src/libs/ReportUtils.js

+
+    let finalParticipantAccountIDs = [];
+    if (isMoneyRequestReport(report)) {
+        // For money requests i.e the IOU (1:1 person) and Expense (1:* person) reports, use the full `initialParticipantAccountIDs` array


NAB but this is not quite correct as the distinction between IOUs and Expense reports. IOUs are person-to-person while Expense reports are person-to-business.

Also, there are other types of money requests that we haven't added to NewDot yet:

invoice: business-to-business or business-to-person

bill: what the recipient sees when they receive an invoice

Suggested change

// For money requests i.e the IOU (1:1 person) and Expense (1:* person) reports, use the full `initialParticipantAccountIDs` array

// For money requests, use the full `initialParticipantAccountIDs` array

OSBotify · 2023-09-19T23:28:46Z

✋ 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 · 2023-09-20T08:44:30Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 1.3.72-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2023-09-22T13:26:25Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.3.72-11 🚀

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

Show local time in money request and 1:1 chat threads

0be9688

huzaifa-99 requested a review from a team as a code owner September 6, 2023 03:31

melvin-bot bot requested review from ArekChr and removed request for a team September 6, 2023 03:32

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 6, 2023

View reviewed changes

huzaifa-99 mentioned this pull request Sep 6, 2023

[HOLD for payment 2023-09-29] [$1000] Time of User A doesn't appear for User B in IOU or Task room. #24228

Closed

6 tasks

ArekChr reviewed Sep 11, 2023

View reviewed changes

huzaifa-99 added 2 commits September 11, 2023 16:17

Merge branch 'main' into 24228-fix-user-local-time

0c5d253

Simplify logic for participant local time in report utils

24e0a47

ArekChr approved these changes Sep 12, 2023

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from roryabraham September 12, 2023 12:31

Merge branch 'main' into 24228-fix-user-local-time

723b331

roryabraham approved these changes Sep 19, 2023

View reviewed changes

roryabraham merged commit b2e29b5 into Expensify:main Sep 19, 2023
12 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Sep 20, 2023

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2023-09-20 #27837

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Show local time in money request and 1:1 chat threads #26845

Show local time in money request and 1:1 chat threads #26845

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 6, 2023

melvin-bot bot commented Sep 6, 2023

huzaifa-99 Sep 6, 2023

huzaifa-99 Sep 6, 2023

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 7, 2023

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 7, 2023

ArekChr commented Sep 7, 2023

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 8, 2023

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 11, 2023

ArekChr commented Sep 11, 2023

ArekChr Sep 11, 2023

huzaifa-99 Sep 11, 2023 •

edited

Loading

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 12, 2023

ArekChr commented Sep 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading

ArekChr commented Sep 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading

ArekChr commented Sep 12, 2023

ArekChr left a comment

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 13, 2023

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 14, 2023

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 15, 2023

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 19, 2023

roryabraham Sep 19, 2023

OSBotify commented Sep 19, 2023

OSBotify commented Sep 20, 2023

OSBotify commented Sep 22, 2023

	// For money requests i.e the IOU (1:1 person) and Expense (1:* person) reports, use the full `initialParticipantAccountIDs` array
	// For money requests, use the full `initialParticipantAccountIDs` array

Show local time in money request and 1:1 chat threads #26845

Show local time in money request and 1:1 chat threads #26845

Conversation

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 6, 2023

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented Sep 6, 2023

huzaifa-99 Sep 6, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

huzaifa-99 Sep 6, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 7, 2023

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 7, 2023

ArekChr commented Sep 7, 2023

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 8, 2023

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 11, 2023

ArekChr commented Sep 11, 2023

ArekChr Sep 11, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

huzaifa-99 Sep 11, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 12, 2023

ArekChr commented Sep 12, 2023 • edited Loading

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

ArekChr commented Sep 12, 2023 • edited Loading

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 12, 2023 • edited Loading

ArekChr commented Sep 12, 2023

ArekChr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 13, 2023

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 14, 2023

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 15, 2023

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 19, 2023

roryabraham Sep 19, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

OSBotify commented Sep 19, 2023

OSBotify commented Sep 20, 2023

OSBotify commented Sep 22, 2023

huzaifa-99 Sep 11, 2023 •

edited

Loading

ArekChr commented Sep 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading

ArekChr commented Sep 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading

huzaifa-99 commented Sep 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading