Add Approve button for collect policies in the Settlement button

[marcochavezf]

On hold https://github.com/Expensify/Web-Expensify/pull/39328

Details

This PR utilizes the NextStep logic from OldDot to show the "approve" or "pay" button based on the user role (either approver, reimburser, or both) and the reimbursement setup in the collect policy on NewDot (more details here). The approve button was moved to the SettlementButton to show it as another option in the dropdown selector.

This PR can only be tested by someone internal who can set up a control policy with an admin account to approve and reimburse the money requests from NewDot.

Fixed Issues

$ #29145
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Pre-requisites (only in OldDot)

1. Create a collect policy
2. Execute the following JS snippet in the OldDot policy to enable workspace chats creation:

if (Url.getCurrentPageName()!="policy" ){ alert('Only run this snippet from a policy editor!'); } else { var p = Policy.getCurrent(); p.policy.isPolicyExpenseChatEnabled = "true"; p.save().done(function(){$.jGrowl('Workspace chat creation enabled!')}); }

Scenario 1: Approver as admin

Setup

1. Add a new collect policy admin (it can be the same person that created the policy).
2. Add the admin as Submit reports to: in Submit and Approve.
3. Add a new employee.
4. Add an OPEN bank account to the new collect policy admin by following this SO or by using clitools (only dev).
5. In OldDot go to Reimbursement, select Direct, and select the new collect policy admin as reimburser.
6. Set Manual reimbursement threshold to 0 (to test the Approval and then the Pay functionality).
7. Open NewDot in 2 different sessions; one for the approver and one for the member.

Tests (NewDot)

1. Sign-in with the member account in NewDot and create a manual request.
2. Verify there's no approve or pay button in the request.
3. Sign-in with the admin account, and verify the Approve option appears in the settlement button.
4. Approve the report and verify the message Cash - Approved appears in the report and request preview, the system message approved $x.xx appears in the expense report and the report header contains the approved text.
5. Pay the report and verify the report preview, request preview, and report header changed to paid, and also the system message is shown in the expense report.

Screen.Recording.2023-11-05.at.5.06.58.p.m.mov

Scenario 2: Approver as non-admin

Setup

1. Add a new member (Employee role) to the collect policy.
2. Add the new member as Submit reports to: in Submit and Approve.
3. Open NewDot in 3 different sessions; one for the reimburser, one for the approver and one for the member.

Tests (NewDot)

1. Sign in with the member account in NewDot and create a manual request.
2. Verify there's no approve or pay button in the request.
3. Sign in with the approver account, verify the Approve option appears in the settlement button.
4. Approve the report and verify the message Cash - Approved appears in the report and request preview, the system message approved $x.xx appears in the expense report and the report header contains the approved text.
5. Sign in with the reimburser account
6. Pay the report and verify the report preview, request preview, and report header changed to paid, and also the system message is shown in the expense report.

Screen.Recording.2023-11-05.at.5.10.40.p.m.mov

• 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
    • 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

Screen.Recording.2023-10-31.at.6.56.33.p.m.mov

Mobile Web - Chrome

Mobile Web - Safari

Desktop

iOS

Screen.Recording.2023-12-06.at.9.04.18.p.m.mov

Android

[cloudflare-workers-and-pages]

Deploying with    Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit:	516f0cc
Status:	✅  Deploy successful!
Preview URL:	https://60b54954.helpdot.pages.dev
Branch Preview URL:	https://marco-approvebuttoncollectpo.helpdot.pages.dev

View logs

[marcochavezf]

Thanks for the review! Updated and ready for review again

[marcochavezf]

Oops like like prettier doesn't like the comments above the ternary operator

[shubham1206agra]

Oops like like prettier doesn't like the comments above the ternary operator

Maybe move the comment a line up

[marcochavezf]

Maybe move the comment a line up

That was suggested here, but after applying the change the linter complained about it. Since this is just comment formatting, I will leave it as is.

[shubham1206agra]

Approving again :)

[melvin-bot]

@cristipaval 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]

[shubham1206agra]

@marcochavezf Are we waiting on something?

[marcochavezf]

@marcochavezf Are we waiting on something?

Just waiting for @marcaaron or @cristipaval for final review

[OSBotify]

✋ 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]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcochavezf in version: 1.4.12-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcochavezf in version: 1.4.12-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcochavezf in version: 1.4.12-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 1.4.12-2 🚀

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

[eVoloshchak]

Coming from #35666
As @marcochavezf pointed out in this comment, we were getting the 'Approved' status from the wrong report (transaction report) instead of the money request
It should be ReportUtils.isReportApproved(moneyRequestReport)