Fix getPreviousRelease and artifacts #49028

luacmartins · 2024-09-11T21:54:02Z

Details

Updates the logic to handle the case where the inputTag is at index 0, then the previous tag would be at index 1.

Fixed Issues

$ https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C07J32337/p1726088556657179?thread_ts=1726069971.489869&cid=C07J32337

Tests

Use GH API to fetch the list of releases

curl -L \
  -H "Accept: application/vnd.github+json" \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer <TOKEN>" \
  -H "X-GitHub-Api-Version: 2022-11-28" \
  https://api.github.com/repos/Expensify/App/releases\?per_page\=100

Copy the data into a prerelease.js file
Add this snippet to the same file

const data = <DATA FROM THE API CALL>;

function getPreviousRelease(data) {
    let foundCurrentRelease = false;
    const inputTag = '9.0.32-4';
    const filteredData = true ? data.filter((release) => !release.prerelease) : data;

    if (foundCurrentRelease) {
        const priorTag = data.at(0)?.tag_name;
        return priorTag;
    }

    const indexOfCurrentRelease = filteredData.findIndex((release) => release.tag_name === inputTag);
    // If it happens to be at the end of this page, then the previous tag will be in the next page.
    // Set a flag showing we found it so we grab the first release of the next page
    if (indexOfCurrentRelease === filteredData.length - 1) {
        foundCurrentRelease = true;
        return '';
    }

    // If it's anywhere else in this page, the the prior release is the next item in the page
    if (indexOfCurrentRelease >= 0) {
        const priorTag = filteredData.at(indexOfCurrentRelease + 1)?.tag_name;
        return priorTag;
    }
}

console.log(getPreviousRelease(data));

Run the snippet node /path/to/file
Verify that it works and finds the previous production release which is 9.0.31-26

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

melvin-bot · 2024-09-11T21:56:21Z

@stitesExpensify 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]

AndrewGable · 2024-09-11T22:45:50Z

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

Fix getPreviousRelease and artifacts (cherry picked from commit f3498e2) (CP triggered by luacmartins)

OSBotify · 2024-09-11T23:00:20Z

✋ 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 · 2024-09-11T23:25:07Z

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.0.33-1 🚀

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

@Expensify/applauseleads please QA this PR and check it off on the deploy checklist if it passes.

OSBotify · 2024-09-12T21:20:05Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.0.33-4 🚀

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

fix getPreviousRelease

cf6e0f3

luacmartins self-assigned this Sep 11, 2024

luacmartins marked this pull request as ready for review September 11, 2024 21:55

luacmartins requested a review from a team as a code owner September 11, 2024 21:55

melvin-bot bot requested review from stitesExpensify and removed request for a team September 11, 2024 21:56

luacmartins requested a review from AndrewGable September 11, 2024 21:56

try fix artifacts

c9966ec

luacmartins changed the title ~~Fix getPreviousRelease~~ Fix getPreviousRelease and artifacts Sep 11, 2024

update more places

62c3410

AndrewGable approved these changes Sep 11, 2024

View reviewed changes

AndrewGable merged commit f3498e2 into main Sep 11, 2024
14 checks passed

AndrewGable deleted the cmartins-fixGetPreviousRelease branch September 11, 2024 22:49

OSBotify pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 11, 2024

Merge pull request #49028 from Expensify/cmartins-fixGetPreviousRelease

26504e5

Fix getPreviousRelease and artifacts (cherry picked from commit f3498e2) (CP triggered by luacmartins)

github-actions bot added the CP Staging marks PRs that have been CP'd to staging label Sep 11, 2024

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Sep 11, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-09-11 #49025

Closed

49 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Fix getPreviousRelease and artifacts #49028

Fix getPreviousRelease and artifacts #49028

luacmartins commented Sep 11, 2024 •

edited

Loading

melvin-bot bot commented Sep 11, 2024

AndrewGable commented Sep 11, 2024 •

edited

Loading

OSBotify commented Sep 11, 2024

OSBotify commented Sep 11, 2024

OSBotify commented Sep 12, 2024

Fix getPreviousRelease and artifacts #49028

Fix getPreviousRelease and artifacts #49028

Conversation

luacmartins commented Sep 11, 2024 • edited Loading

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented Sep 11, 2024

AndrewGable commented Sep 11, 2024 • edited Loading

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

OSBotify commented Sep 11, 2024

OSBotify commented Sep 11, 2024

OSBotify commented Sep 12, 2024

luacmartins commented Sep 11, 2024 •

edited

Loading

AndrewGable commented Sep 11, 2024 •

edited

Loading