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

Fix/19496 2fa steps refactor #23060

Merged
merged 36 commits into from
Aug 18, 2023
Merged

Conversation

koko57
Copy link
Contributor

@koko57 koko57 commented Jul 18, 2023

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #19496
PROPOSAL: #19496

Tests

  1. Open Settings -> Security -> Two-Factor authentication
  2. Go through the whole flow
  3. Check if you're able to navigate between Codes step and Verify step (and back)
  4. Verify if you shouldn't be able to navigate back to the Codes and Verify step.
  5. Verify if you shouldn't be able to access the flow by the old links.
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

  1. Open Settings -> Security -> Two-Factor authentication
  2. Go through the whole flow
  3. Check if you're able to navigate between Codes step and Verify step (and back)
  4. Verify if you shouldn't be able to navigate back to the Codes and Verify step.
  5. Verify if you shouldn't be able to access the flow by the old links.
  • 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 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
    • 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 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
Screen.Recording.2023-07-18.at.08.45.37.mp4
Mobile Web - Chrome
Screen.Recording.2023-07-19.at.10.53.46.mp4
Mobile Web - Safari
Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.14.-.2023-07-18.at.08.53.56.mov
Desktop
Screen.Recording.2023-07-18.at.08.51.25.mp4
iOS
Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.14.-.2023-07-18.at.08.57.20.mov
Android
Screen.Recording.2023-07-19.at.10.47.10.mp4

Copy link
Contributor

@ArekChr ArekChr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Left few minor comments, overall LGTM 👌

@koko57 koko57 requested a review from ArekChr July 18, 2023 08:26
Copy link
Contributor

@fabioh8010 fabioh8010 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Besides the comments, LGTM!

Copy link
Contributor

@rezkiy37 rezkiy37 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Left a couple comments. In general, LGTM 🙂

@koko57 koko57 requested review from fabioh8010, gedu and rezkiy37 July 18, 2023 14:48
Copy link
Contributor

@rezkiy37 rezkiy37 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@koko57 koko57 marked this pull request as ready for review July 19, 2023 09:10
@koko57 koko57 requested a review from a team as a code owner July 19, 2023 09:10
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot removed request for a team, gedu, fabioh8010 and ArekChr July 19, 2023 09:10
@koko57
Copy link
Contributor Author

koko57 commented Aug 17, 2023

@aimane-chnaif @deetergp I'll be OOO from tomorrow till next Friday, but if you request any changes, someone from Callstack team would be able to take over this issue.

@aimane-chnaif
Copy link
Contributor

I think we are almost close. Please fix lint. Please request my review once ready

@koko57
Copy link
Contributor Author

koko57 commented Aug 17, 2023

@aimane-chnaif ready!

@deetergp
Copy link
Contributor

@aimane-chnaif Bump!

@aimane-chnaif
Copy link
Contributor

On it now

@aimane-chnaif
Copy link
Contributor

@aimane-chnaif about the bug 5 - it seems it's because you are starting the flow on another device. It's also how it behaves now on staging. I'll see if it's easily fixable if so, I'll fix it here. If not maybe it should be discussed (the expected behavior) and could be fixed in a follow-up PR?

@deetergp what do you think about Bug 4 and 5? Definitely follow-up but just to confirm if it's bug or expected.

@aimane-chnaif
Copy link
Contributor

Link is not translated. Seems like regression from #25164. So out of scope

Screenshot 2023-08-18 at 11 32 36 PM

@aimane-chnaif
Copy link
Contributor

aimane-chnaif commented Aug 18, 2023

iOS app crashes on simulator after fulfill 2fa code. This is known bug - #18874 so out of scope

ios-enable.mov

@deetergp
Copy link
Contributor

The fact that Bug 5 already exists makes it out of scope. I feel the same way about Bug 4.

@aimane-chnaif
Copy link
Contributor

aimane-chnaif commented Aug 18, 2023

On android native or mChrome, sometimes not auto-scrolled down to 2fa input while auto-focus is working. Confirmed also happening on staging so out of scope.

scroll.mov
android.mov

@aimane-chnaif
Copy link
Contributor

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
web.mov
Mobile Web - Chrome
mchrome.mov
Mobile Web - Safari
msafari.mov
Desktop
desktop.mov
iOS
ios-disable.mov
ios-enable.mov
Android
android.mov

Copy link
Contributor

@aimane-chnaif aimane-chnaif left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good except known issues which are out of scope

@deetergp all yours

@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Aug 18, 2023

🎯 @aimane-chnaif, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉

An E/App issue has been created to issue payment here: #25518.

@deetergp deetergp merged commit 582aa46 into Expensify:main Aug 18, 2023
@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
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/deetergp in version: 1.3.56-0 🚀

platform result
🤖 android 🤖 failure ❌
🖥 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 ✅

Comment on lines +32 to +34
useEffect(() => {
Session.clearAccountMessages();
}, []);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Coming from #28937. Not really a bug but more like an improvement. We should have cleared the errors on the clean up function as well.

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.

10 participants