[No QA] Fix: Expensify engineer is not tagged and assigned in Deploy Checklist to complete the QA for PRs with Internal QA. #38434

rayane-djouah · 2024-03-16T11:28:29Z

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #37691
PROPOSAL: #37691 (comment)

Tests

N/A

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

N/A

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: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- iOS: mWeb 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 either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
- 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 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(theme.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 the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
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.

Screenshots/Videos

N/A

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

…d-assigned-in-Deploy-Checklist-to-complete-the-QA-for-PRs-with-Internal-QA

…t to complete the QA for PRs with Internal QA.

rayane-djouah · 2024-03-16T14:48:57Z

.github/libs/GithubUtils.js

+                const internalQAPRs = _.filter(data, (pr) => !_.isEmpty(_.findWhere(pr.labels, {name: CONST.LABELS.INTERNAL_QA})));
+                return Promise.all(_.map(internalQAPRs, (pr) => this.getPullRequestMergerLogin(pr.number).then((mergerLogin) => ({url: pr.html_url, mergerLogin})))).then((results) => {
+                    // The format of this map is following:
+                    // {
+                    //    'https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/9641': 'PauloGasparSv',
+                    //    'https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/9642': 'mountiny'
+                    // }
+                    const internalQAPRMap = _.reduce(
+                        results,
+                        (acc, {url, mergerLogin}) => {
+                            acc[url] = mergerLogin;
+                            return acc;
+                        },
+                        {},
+                    );
+                    console.log('Found the following Internal QA PRs:', internalQAPRMap);


The Staging checklist failed here: https://github.com/Expensify/App/actions/runs/8231107620/job/22505767275 because the data returned from the github api when fetching the PR data here does not contain merged_by attribute, we can verify this here: https://api.github.com/repos/Expensify/App/pulls?state=closed
We should call the api for each internal Qa PR to get the merged_by attribute, example: https://api.github.com/repos/Expensify/App/pulls/37088 , to do this, I added a utils function here to fetch PR merger login.

melvin-bot · 2024-03-16T14:50:54Z

@aimane-chnaif 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]

rayane-djouah · 2024-03-16T14:51:54Z

@aimane-chnaif could you please approve to assign @roryabraham ? this doesn't require C+ review. Thanks!

roryabraham · 2024-03-16T15:27:58Z

Thanks @rayane-djouah. I was OOO the last couple days and can't easily do the checklist from my mobile, so I'll plan to review this on Monday

roryabraham · 2024-03-21T20:33:56Z

.github/libs/GithubUtils.js

-                issueBody += '\r\n\r\ncc @Expensify/applauseleads\r\n';
-                return issueBody;
+                const internalQAPRs = _.filter(data, (pr) => !_.isEmpty(_.findWhere(pr.labels, {name: CONST.LABELS.INTERNAL_QA})));
+                return Promise.all(_.map(internalQAPRs, (pr) => this.getPullRequestMergerLogin(pr.number).then((mergerLogin) => ({url: pr.html_url, mergerLogin})))).then((results) => {


@rayane-djouah why do we need to do another network request to get the PR merger login? isn't that information already available on the pr object?

The merged_by attribute is not available in the response from the "List Pull Requests" endpoint. This can be confirmed by checking the endpoint's response schema here and by inspecting the actual response from https://api.github.com/repos/Expensify/App/pulls?state=closed. To obtain this information, we should use the "Get a Pull Request" endpoint. The need for additional network requests will primarily affect internal QA PRs.

roryabraham · 2024-03-23T18:32:37Z

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: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- iOS: mWeb 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 either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
- 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(theme.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 the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
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

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

OSBotify · 2024-03-23T18:39:11Z

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

rayane-djouah · 2024-03-23T20:15:00Z

@roryabraham can we add internal QA label to this PR? Thank you.

rayane-djouah added 9 commits March 16, 2024 02:03

Fix error

e305ead

Merge branch 'main' into Github-Actions-Fix-Engineer-is-not-tagged-an…

bb9a2af

…d-assigned-in-Deploy-Checklist-to-complete-the-QA-for-PRs-with-Internal-QA

Fix: Expensify engineer is not tagged and assigned in Deploy Checklis…

9cf10ab

…t to complete the QA for PRs with Internal QA.

Fix error

b34367a

Fix errors

33becde

Fix lint errors

3485ea7

Fix lint errors

6f3a4ed

Build Actions

56b0926

Build Actions

0ad44d1

rayane-djouah commented Mar 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

rayane-djouah marked this pull request as ready for review March 16, 2024 14:50

rayane-djouah requested a review from a team as a code owner March 16, 2024 14:50

melvin-bot bot requested review from aimane-chnaif and removed request for a team March 16, 2024 14:50

roryabraham requested review from roryabraham and removed request for aimane-chnaif March 16, 2024 15:26

roryabraham reviewed Mar 21, 2024

View reviewed changes

rayane-djouah requested a review from roryabraham March 21, 2024 22:57

roryabraham approved these changes Mar 23, 2024

View reviewed changes

roryabraham merged commit 578487e into Expensify:main Mar 23, 2024
16 of 23 checks passed

roryabraham added the InternalQA This pull request required internal QA label Mar 23, 2024

rayane-djouah changed the title ~~[No QA] Fix: Expensify engineer is not tagged and assigned in Deploy Checklist to complete the QA for PRs with Internal QA.~~ Fix: Expensify engineer is not tagged and assigned in Deploy Checklist to complete the QA for PRs with Internal QA. Mar 25, 2024

rayane-djouah changed the title ~~Fix: Expensify engineer is not tagged and assigned in Deploy Checklist to complete the QA for PRs with Internal QA.~~ [No QA] Fix: Expensify engineer is not tagged and assigned in Deploy Checklist to complete the QA for PRs with Internal QA. Mar 25, 2024

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Mar 27, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-03-27 #39033

Closed

rayane-djouah deleted the Github-Actions-Fix-Engineer-is-not-tagged-and-assigned-in-Deploy-Checklist-to-complete-the-QA-for-PRs-with-Internal-QA branch March 28, 2024 18:02

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Mar 29, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-04-05] [$500] Internal QA checklist not working for external PRs #37691

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[No QA] Fix: Expensify engineer is not tagged and assigned in Deploy Checklist to complete the QA for PRs with Internal QA. #38434

[No QA] Fix: Expensify engineer is not tagged and assigned in Deploy Checklist to complete the QA for PRs with Internal QA. #38434

rayane-djouah commented Mar 16, 2024

rayane-djouah Mar 16, 2024 •

edited

Loading

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 16, 2024

rayane-djouah commented Mar 16, 2024

roryabraham commented Mar 16, 2024

roryabraham Mar 21, 2024

rayane-djouah Mar 21, 2024

roryabraham commented Mar 23, 2024

OSBotify commented Mar 23, 2024

rayane-djouah commented Mar 23, 2024

[No QA] Fix: Expensify engineer is not tagged and assigned in Deploy Checklist to complete the QA for PRs with Internal QA. #38434

[No QA] Fix: Expensify engineer is not tagged and assigned in Deploy Checklist to complete the QA for PRs with Internal QA. #38434

Conversation

rayane-djouah commented Mar 16, 2024

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

rayane-djouah Mar 16, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 16, 2024

rayane-djouah commented Mar 16, 2024

roryabraham commented Mar 16, 2024

roryabraham Mar 21, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rayane-djouah Mar 21, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

roryabraham commented Mar 23, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

OSBotify commented Mar 23, 2024

rayane-djouah commented Mar 23, 2024

rayane-djouah Mar 16, 2024 •

edited

Loading