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

Validate mission start screens messed up when there are no labels to validate #3126

Closed
misaugstad opened this issue Feb 8, 2023 · 9 comments · Fixed by #3394
Closed

Validate mission start screens messed up when there are no labels to validate #3126

misaugstad opened this issue Feb 8, 2023 · 9 comments · Fixed by #3394
Assignees

Comments

@misaugstad
Copy link
Member

Brief description of problem/feature

We used to have a screen that was shown on Validate immediately upon loading the page if there were no labels available to validate that would direct them to the Explore page to collect more data. This only really happens when a server is very new and not much data has been collected. With the new mission screens, we forgot to check for this edge case, so in Taipei we just see this:

Screenshot from 2023-02-07 18-08-33

This page is still available on mobile though!

@jonfroehlich
Copy link
Member

Can confirm that our system crashes on this. In preparation for our Auckland phone call, I was doing validations--and it looks like I ran out of labels to validate! 😂

image

Uncaught (in promise) TypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'remove')
    at SVValidate.js:2488:49
    at streetview.js:65:132
    at streetview.js:97:267

Then I tried it in a new window and got this:
image

@misaugstad and I think this might be because I validated all labels in Auckland and there is nothing left

@misaugstad
Copy link
Member Author

We didn't remove the code for this, we just broke it somehow 😁 I think it has to do with how we used to use the same HTML elements for the mission start screen and the screen where we say that there are no more missions left. So we were just editing the text on that screen.

Now what we probably need to do is when there are no labels to validate is to hide our usual mission screen, and show the old one instead (with the correct text). You can see a pic below of what it looked like at one point in time:
image

Given that very few users will ever see this screen, I'm find with using the ugly version that we have ;) Most of the code for it is in ModalNoNewMission.js!

@misaugstad
Copy link
Member Author

And you should be able to temporarily edit the back-end code to return no labels to the front-end to test this temporarily!

We should make sure that this works when there are no labels to start, and if you finish one mission and aren't able to do another one after it because we're out of labels!

@jonfroehlich
Copy link
Member

Just came here to humbly say that this is still a problem and now quite evident on our new Cuenca server :)

image

@jonfroehlich
Copy link
Member

On the new Keelung server, I was able to get past the initial mission screen but then the validation UI loaded and looks like this:

image

@kevinjtwu
Copy link
Collaborator

I think I've replicated the issue by editing the backend to return a null JsValue
image

@kevinjtwu
Copy link
Collaborator

What should we do on mobile? The no new missions screen asks the user to explore, but we can't explore on mobile.
image

@kevinjtwu
Copy link
Collaborator

What should we do on mobile? The no new missions screen asks the user to explore, but we can't explore on mobile. image

Currently, clicking on 'Start Exploring' redirects the user to the Seattle server to validate labels.

@misaugstad
Copy link
Member Author

It looks like at the bottom of ModealNoNewMission.js the test for that was set with this line

uiModalMission.closeButton.html(i18next.t('mission-complete.no-new-mission-button') + ` Seattle, WA`);

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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants