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

Android-BA-Tapping connect online with plaid shows 2 spin circles loading #32641

Conversation

ZhenjaHorbach
Copy link
Contributor

@ZhenjaHorbach ZhenjaHorbach commented Dec 7, 2023

Details

Android-BA-Tapping connect online with plaid shows 2 spin circles loading

Fixed Issues

$ #32298
PROPOSAL: #32298 (comment)

Tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console
  1. Launch app
  2. Tap profile icon
  3. Tap Workspaces
  4. Tap on a Workspace
  5. Tap Bank account
  6. Tap "connect online with plaid"
  7. Notice only one loader before opening the plaid screen

Offline tests

  1. Launch app
  2. Tap profile icon
  3. Tap Workspaces
  4. Tap on a Workspace
  5. Tap Bank account
  6. Tap "connect online with plaid"
  7. Notice only one loader before opening the plaid screen

QA Steps

  1. Launch app
  2. Tap profile icon
  3. Tap Workspaces
  4. Tap on a Workspace
  5. Tap Bank account
  6. Tap "connect online with plaid"
  7. Notice only one loader before opening the plaid screen
  • 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 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 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 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

Android: Native
android.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
android.web.mov
iOS: Native
ios.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
ios.web.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web.mov
MacOS: Desktop
desktop.mov

@ZhenjaHorbach ZhenjaHorbach requested a review from a team as a code owner December 7, 2023 10:41
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from akinwale and removed request for a team December 7, 2023 10:41
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Dec 7, 2023

@akinwale 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]

@ZhenjaHorbach
Copy link
Contributor Author

@akinwale
Hello )
PR is ready )

Plus a little explanation

I added a loader inside PlaidLink
Since the web requires a large amount of time to initialize
And to fill the space
I added a loader

@akinwale
Copy link
Contributor

akinwale commented Dec 19, 2023

@ZhenjaHorbach With the loader inside PlaidLink, on destkop and web, two loaders are displayed when PlaidLink is active. Only one loader should be displayed in this scenario. See the included video.

32641-web.mp4

@ZhenjaHorbach
Copy link
Contributor Author

ZhenjaHorbach commented Dec 19, 2023

@ZhenjaHorbach With the loader inside PlaidLink, on destkop and web, two loaders are displayed when PlaidLink is active. Only one loader should be displayed in this scenario. See the included video.

32641-web.mp4

@akinwale

Hello )
I know

#32685
This problem is related to another bug. The fact that we do not have a white background
When the background appears
We will have 1 loader

But I'm keeping an eye on this bug
Once it's on the main branch
I'll notice

But from the other side, we have the same bug on the main
So I don't know what's best to do
Should we wait for one bug to be fixed or should we not wait?

@akinwale
Copy link
Contributor

@ZhenjaHorbach Thank you for your response.

Could you please test with the solution in the accepted proposal from the referenced issue and show a video with the fix? If only one loader is displayed, then we do not have to wait for the other PR to be ready and I can go ahead to approve this one. Thanks.

@ZhenjaHorbach
Copy link
Contributor Author

@akinwale
No problem, I'll do it today

@ZhenjaHorbach
Copy link
Contributor Author

@akinwale
Here's an example of what it will look like when another bug is fixed

Screen.Recording.2023-12-19.at.17.13.17.mov

@akinwale
Copy link
Contributor

akinwale commented Dec 21, 2023

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 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(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 form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label 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
32641-android-native.webm
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
32641-ios-native.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
32641-ios-safari.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
32641-web.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
32641-desktop.mp4

Copy link
Contributor

@akinwale akinwale left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM.

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from Beamanator December 21, 2023 10:47
Comment on lines +219 to +223
if (plaidDataErrorMessage) {
return <Text style={[styles.formError, styles.mh5]}>{plaidDataErrorMessage}</Text>;
}

if (lodashGet(plaidData, 'isLoading')) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The one thing I'm slightly worried about here... is this way, we'll never be able to show the error message AND a loading indicator at the same time, right? Where previously we could... Can we make sure this doesn't cause any regressions?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since we expect only one state from the backend
-isLoader (Loader)
-bankName (PlaidLink)
-Error (Text error)
I'm not sure that such cases are possible

optimisticData: [
{
onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
key: ONYXKEYS.PLAID_DATA,
value: {
isLoading: true,
errors: null,
bankName,
},
},
],
successData: [
{
onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
key: ONYXKEYS.PLAID_DATA,
value: {
isLoading: false,
errors: null,
},
},
],
failureData: [
{
onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
key: ONYXKEYS.PLAID_DATA,
value: {
isLoading: false,
},
},
],

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

hmm those are just optimistic loading states though, i could see a situation where an error happens and we want to try again so we set isLoading again, right?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@Beamanator @ZhenjaHorbach that's what I was pointing out, even if we have an error message we will only show the loader because the loader is inside PlaidLink component and we will always show the PlaidLink, and if we show the error then we can't retry because the PlaidLink component will not be rendered.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We get the state for showing components from plaidData
If we have at the moment optimisticData we show loader
If we have at the moment successData we show plaidData (The loader that is located inside the web plaidLink is associated with that the component we use requires initialization )
If we have the moment failure we show error text

And if we will get error when plaidLink is open we will skip token and hide plaidLink but show error text

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

oh wait ya i see that we clear the error any time we try again so most likely they won't ever be shown at the same time

Copy link
Contributor

@Beamanator Beamanator left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this will work pretty well, i can't come up with a case where we'll want to show multiple of the 3 rendered options, so let's merge!

@Beamanator Beamanator merged commit f7efad3 into Expensify:main Dec 22, 2023
23 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/Beamanator in version: 1.4.16-3 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.4.16-5 🚀

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

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.

5 participants