Add violation message to MoneyRequestPreview #33969

trevor-coleman · 2024-01-04T17:51:27Z

Details

Adds a message to the MoneyRequestPreview that shows the violation or "Review Required"

No violation
With single violation with name <15 chars (shows violation)
With multiple violations or name >15 chars (shows "review required")

Fixed Issues

$ #32571

Tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Setup: Creating A Policy with Violations Test Cases

Turn on the Violations beta (or set canUseViolations to true)
Go to OldDot and open or create a Control policy
Enable violations for the workspace in Settings > [Workspace] > Expenses
1. Expense Violations: true
2. Max Expense Amount: $10
Make tags required for the policy
1. Go to Settings > [Workspace] > Tags
2. Enable "People must tag expenses"
3. Add a tag
  5Enable the policy’s expense chat (reference link):
4. Go to the policy page
5. In the JS console with the policy open do:
```
p = Policy.getCurrent();
p.policy.isPolicyExpenseChatEnabled = "true";
p.save();
```
6. Invite a new user to the policy
7. Sign into that new user account in New Dot
8. Go through the money request flow, choosing the policy you just created and create the following money requests:
  
  Test Case Amount Tag
  
  No Violation $5 Yes
  
  Missing Tag (short message) $5 No
  
  Over Limit (long message) $20 Yes

Check that the correct message is displayed

Open the policy chat for the policy you created
Touch the Report Preview for the report that contains your money requests

The money requests should look as follows:

Money Request Status	Screenshot	Expected Display
No Violation		Should look as in screenshot. No violation message displayed
Missing Tag		Should show "missing tag" message in light grey text at top
Over Limit		Should show "Review required in light grey text at top"

Offline tests

N/A - Should work as described above

QA Steps

Same as Testing steps above

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

No violation	With single violation with name <15 chars	With multiple violations or name >15 chars

Android: mWeb Chrome

Without violation	With single violation	With multiple violations

iOS: Native

Without violation	With single violation	With multiple violations

iOS: mWeb Safari

Without violation	With single violation	With multiple violations

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Without violation

With single violation

With multiple violations

MacOS: Desktop

Without violation	With short violation	With long violation

…o trevor-coleman/violations/32571-money-request-preview

…571-money-request-preview

…eview.

…71-money-request-preview Trevor coleman/violations/32571 money request preview

…-preview # Conflicts: # src/libs/ReportUtils.ts # src/libs/SidebarUtils.ts # src/libs/TransactionUtils.ts # src/libs/ViolationsUtils.ts # src/types/onyx/index.ts # tests/perf-test/SidebarUtils.perf-test.ts

…o 32571-money-request-preview # Conflicts: # tests/perf-test/SidebarUtils.perf-test.ts

# Conflicts: # src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestPreview.js # src/components/ViolationMessages.tsx # src/libs/SidebarUtils.ts # src/libs/Violations/ViolationsUtils.ts # src/libs/__mocks__/Permissions.ts # tests/perf-test/SidebarUtils.perf-test.ts

…emoization

…ata prop names.

…sages

…-preview # Conflicts: # src/CONST.ts # src/components/ReportActionItem/ReportPreview.js # src/pages/home/ReportScreen.js

melvin-bot · 2024-01-11T19:29:35Z

@parasharrajat 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]

akinwale · 2024-02-15T20:41:24Z

@trevor-coleman I am not able to get the over-limit violation despite having the Control policy set up according to the instructions in the test steps.

Screen.Recording.2024-02-15.at.21.33.11.mp4

situchan · 2024-02-15T20:42:32Z

@akinwale your account should have violations beta permission set in backend

trevor-coleman · 2024-02-15T20:42:51Z

Which account are you using? I think @cead22 needs to enable violations for it in the back end.

akinwale · 2024-02-15T20:58:40Z

@trevor-coleman A couple of things I noticed from my testing (video included).

For the over-limit violation, the error message and the red dot do not show up until I actually open IOU report and then navigate back to the expense report. Is this intended?
~~When there are two violations (missing tag and over-limit), only the over-limit error is shown on the IOU report. I would assume that both errors should be visible here.~~ Actually, looks like the missing tag error is not displayed on the IOU report at all, even if it's just the tag missing, so that's out of scope here.

33969-web.mp4

trevor-coleman · 2024-02-15T21:05:14Z

For the over-limit violation, the error message and the red dot do not show up until I actually open IOU report and then navigate back to the expense report. Is this intended?

This is a known issue outside the scope of this PR -- I believe it should be fixed when the optimistic update PR is merged.

When there are two violations (missing tag and over-limit), only the over-limit error is shown on the IOU report. I would assume that both errors should be visible here.

The spec for this is:

For a single violation:
- if the message is less than 15 characters, then show that violation message
- if the message is more than 15 characters, then show a generic "Review Required" message
For multiple violations always show "Review Required"

The only violation shorter than 15 characters (in English) is missingTag all the rest are longer, so this is the expected behaviour.

akinwale · 2024-02-15T21:09:04Z

The spec for this is:

For a single violation:

if the message is less than 15 characters, then show that violation message

if the message is more than 15 characters, then show a generic "Review Required" message

For multiple violations always show "Review Required"

The only violation shorter than 15 characters (in English) is missingTag all the rest are longer, so this is the expected behaviour.

I understand this part (for the preview). I was referring to the actual report itself, which is open after clicking the preview, but I realise that is out of scope here.

Everything looks good!

trevor-coleman · 2024-02-15T21:13:58Z

Awesome! Yeah the report itself is going to be fixed elsewhere -- right now it only updates when data is fetched from the server, but when the optimistiic updates stuff gets merged then we'll calculate them on the fly.

akinwale · 2024-02-15T21:18:15Z

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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

33969-web.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

akinwale

LGTM.

cead22 · 2024-02-16T20:06:42Z

src/languages/en.ts

@@ -2303,8 +2303,8 @@ export default {
        overLimitAttendee: ({formattedLimit}: ViolationsOverLimitParams) => `Amount over ${formattedLimit}/person limit`,
        perDayLimit: ({formattedLimit}: ViolationsPerDayLimitParams) => `Amount over daily ${formattedLimit}/person category limit`,
        receiptNotSmartScanned: 'Receipt not verified. Please confirm accuracy.',
-        receiptRequired: ({formattedLimit, category}: ViolationsReceiptRequiredParams = {}) =>
-            `Receipt required${formattedLimit ? ` over ${formattedLimit}${category ? ' category limit' : ''}` : ''}`,
+        receiptRequired: (params: ViolationsReceiptRequiredParams) => `Receipt required${params ? ` over ${params.formattedLimit}${params.category ? ` category limit` : ''}` : ''}`,


Is there a reason for this change? I see we didn't make the same change in the es.ts file, can we undo this?

We discussed it here: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1704823942664409?thread_ts=1704302068.776969&cid=C01GTK53T8Q

I've updated them to be like this:

Params English Translation Spanish Translation

No params Receipt required Recibo obligatorio

{ formattedLimit: '$500' } Receipt required over $500 Recibo obligatorio para importes sobre $500

{ category: 'travel' } Receipt required over travel category limit Recibo obligatorio para importes sobre el límite de la categoría

{ formattedLimit: '$500', category: 'travel' } Receipt required over $500 travel category limit Recibo obligatorio para importes sobre $500 el límite de la categoría

@trevor-coleman @cead22 Coming from this issue #44220 Can you confirm why we don't mention category name on the Spanish translation while we mention it on English translation? Are this intended? or we should fix it.
CC @abzokhattab

We're not showing the category name in either case. We should say literally "category limit" or "límite de la categoría"

We should say literally "category limit" or "límite de la categoría"

@cead22 is this mean the above table is not correct? because it showing the category name "travel" in English translation

I think so. To be honest, I don't remember noticing the "travel" in "travel category limit" in there

The above line use params to check before showing word over which display over undefined if params = {formattedLimit: undefined, category: undefined} and we fixed it here #44220

src/libs/ErrorUtils.ts

src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestPreview/MoneyRequestPreviewContent.tsx

src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestPreview/index.tsx

src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestPreview/MoneyRequestPreviewContent.tsx

cead22

I tested on desktop web and desktop native and it worked fine

OSBotify · 2024-02-17T00:06:05Z

✋ 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 · 2024-02-19T23:46:40Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/cead22 in version: 1.4.43-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2024-02-26T20:52:44Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 1.4.43-20 🚀

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

trevor-coleman added 10 commits January 3, 2024 13:36

Merge branch 'cdanwards/violations/transaction-thread-violations' int…

3c93df2

…o trevor-coleman/violations/32571-money-request-preview

Merge branch 'money-request-fields' into trevor-coleman/violations/32…

4b00ef4

…571-money-request-preview

feat(Violations): add transaction violation message to MoneyRequestPr…

c3268ef

…eview.

Merge pull request #86 from infinitered/trevor-coleman/violations/325…

600fe89

…71-money-request-preview Trevor coleman/violations/32571 money request preview

feat(Violations): fix broken import

54006d9

feat(Violations): refactor for consistency and readability

92f340a

feat(Violations): make dummy string < 15 chars>

48c8083

fix lint

2b51f6a

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into 32571-money-request…

57d0198

…-preview # Conflicts: # src/libs/ReportUtils.ts # src/libs/SidebarUtils.ts # src/libs/TransactionUtils.ts # src/libs/ViolationsUtils.ts # src/types/onyx/index.ts # tests/perf-test/SidebarUtils.perf-test.ts

Merge branch 'cdanwards/violations/transaction-thread-violations' int…

3669bf1

…o 32571-money-request-preview # Conflicts: # tests/perf-test/SidebarUtils.perf-test.ts

trevor-coleman changed the title ~~32571 money request preview~~ Add violation message to MoneyRequestPreview Jan 4, 2024

trevor-coleman added 14 commits January 4, 2024 17:09

feat(Violations): add translation

062a878

feat(Violations): fix import

3ea4132

feat(Violations): move condition outside of component body to allow m…

dd39fd1

…emoization

feat(Violations): update translations to handle null cases. correct d…

d037f7d

…ata prop names.

feat(Violations): filter violations to remove 'notification' type mes…

3b87f13

…sages

feat(Violations): memoize preview header text

ebcff38

feat(Violations): add proptypes and call wrapper component

4d65e64

feat(Violations): fix import

cd0f3a8

feat(Violations): memoize strings

96470a3

lint

5b0e92f

feat(Violations): remove duplicate from merge

37cfb79

feat(Violations): take transaction or transactionId for hasViolation

d166df1

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into 32571-money-request…

7e675ed

…-preview # Conflicts: # src/CONST.ts # src/components/ReportActionItem/ReportPreview.js # src/pages/home/ReportScreen.js

trevor-coleman marked this pull request as ready for review January 11, 2024 19:29

trevor-coleman requested a review from a team as a code owner January 11, 2024 19:29

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team January 11, 2024 19:29

melvin-bot bot requested a review from parasharrajat January 11, 2024 19:29

cead22 requested a review from akinwale February 15, 2024 19:53

akinwale approved these changes Feb 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from cead22 February 15, 2024 21:21

cead22 requested changes Feb 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

trevor-coleman added 4 commits February 16, 2024 17:43

fix(Violations): revert translation

c054731

fix(Violations): move comment

01f6279

fix(Violations): refactor

9f21c3e

fix(Violations): respace comment

79b0598

cead22 previously approved these changes Feb 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

fix(Violations): harmonize translations

e3699d3

trevor-coleman dismissed cead22’s stale review via e3699d3 February 16, 2024 23:29

cead22 approved these changes Feb 17, 2024

View reviewed changes

cead22 merged commit d28f86f into Expensify:main Feb 17, 2024
16 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Feb 19, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-02-19 #36820

Closed

cead22 mentioned this pull request Feb 20, 2024

Fix client side tag violations and Improve function signatures #36821

Merged

59 tasks

kavimuru mentioned this pull request Feb 21, 2024

[Violations] -"Review required" and RBR does not appear immediately for "Over limit" error #37013

Closed

6 tasks

cead22 mentioned this pull request Feb 21, 2024

Update MoneyRequestPreview.js for violations #32571

Closed

This was referenced Jun 18, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-07-17] [$250] Receipt required over undefined is shown in the violation message #43939

Closed

Fix Required Receipt Translations #44220

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add violation message to MoneyRequestPreview #33969

Add violation message to MoneyRequestPreview #33969

trevor-coleman commented Jan 4, 2024 •

edited by cead22

Loading

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 11, 2024

akinwale commented Feb 15, 2024

situchan commented Feb 15, 2024

trevor-coleman commented Feb 15, 2024

akinwale commented Feb 15, 2024 •

edited

Loading

trevor-coleman commented Feb 15, 2024 •

edited

Loading

akinwale commented Feb 15, 2024

trevor-coleman commented Feb 15, 2024

akinwale commented Feb 15, 2024

akinwale left a comment

cead22 Feb 16, 2024

trevor-coleman Feb 16, 2024 •

edited

Loading

ahmedGaber93 Jun 25, 2024

cead22 Jun 25, 2024

ahmedGaber93 Jun 25, 2024 •

edited

Loading

cead22 Jun 25, 2024

ahmedGaber93 Jul 17, 2024

cead22 left a comment

OSBotify commented Feb 17, 2024

OSBotify commented Feb 19, 2024

OSBotify commented Feb 26, 2024

Test Case	Amount	Tag
No Violation	$5	Yes
Missing Tag (short message)	$5	No
Over Limit (long message)	$20	Yes

Params	English Translation	Spanish Translation
No params	`Receipt required`	`Recibo obligatorio`
`{ formattedLimit: '$500' }`	`Receipt required over $500`	`Recibo obligatorio para importes sobre $500`
`{ category: 'travel' }`	`Receipt required over travel category limit`	`Recibo obligatorio para importes sobre el límite de la categoría`
`{ formattedLimit: '$500', category: 'travel' }`	`Receipt required over $500 travel category limit`	`Recibo obligatorio para importes sobre $500 el límite de la categoría`

Add violation message to MoneyRequestPreview #33969

Add violation message to MoneyRequestPreview #33969

Conversation

trevor-coleman commented Jan 4, 2024 • edited by cead22 Loading

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Setup: Creating A Policy with Violations Test Cases

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 11, 2024

akinwale commented Feb 15, 2024

situchan commented Feb 15, 2024

trevor-coleman commented Feb 15, 2024

akinwale commented Feb 15, 2024 • edited Loading

trevor-coleman commented Feb 15, 2024 • edited Loading

akinwale commented Feb 15, 2024

trevor-coleman commented Feb 15, 2024

akinwale commented Feb 15, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

akinwale left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cead22 Feb 16, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

trevor-coleman Feb 16, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ahmedGaber93 Jun 25, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cead22 Jun 25, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ahmedGaber93 Jun 25, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cead22 Jun 25, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ahmedGaber93 Jul 17, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cead22 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

OSBotify commented Feb 17, 2024

OSBotify commented Feb 19, 2024

OSBotify commented Feb 26, 2024

trevor-coleman commented Jan 4, 2024 •

edited by cead22

Loading

akinwale commented Feb 15, 2024 •

edited

Loading

trevor-coleman commented Feb 15, 2024 •

edited

Loading

trevor-coleman Feb 16, 2024 •

edited

Loading

ahmedGaber93 Jun 25, 2024 •

edited

Loading