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 the incorrect payer name on the non-reimbursable transaction #37773

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 25, 2024

Conversation

mollfpr
Copy link
Contributor

@mollfpr mollfpr commented Mar 5, 2024

Details

Change the logic on defining the payer name for a non-reimbursable transaction to show the requestor name instead of the manager/approver name of the workspace.

Fixed Issues

$ #36186
PROPOSAL: #36186 (comment)

Tests

Contributor can't get access to the Expensify Card transaction, so instead we can create a manual request data and merge the data with the dummy Expensify card data via the console. For speed things up, you can put the above code in the component (e.g., ReportScreen).

Onyx.merge('cardList',
{
  4: {
    "bank": "Expensify Card",
    "lastFourPAN": 3458,
  }
}
);

Onyx.merge('transactions_<TRANSACTIONID>', {amount: 1000, currency: 'USD', cardID: 4,  modifiedMerchant: null, merchant: "Test ECard Transaction", mccGroup: "Airlines", status:"Posted", hasEReceipt: true, receipt: {}, reimbursable: false });
  1. Login with an account that an employee of a collect policy
  2. Go to the workspace report and create a manual request
  3. Take a note on the transactionID for the manual request you just created
  4. Merge the dummy data with the transactionID
  5. Verify the text on 3 places below correctly showing <requestor's name> spent

5a. Alternate text on LHN
Screenshot 2024-03-05 at 23 33 50

5b. Report preview
Screenshot 2024-03-05 at 23 33 56

5c. Money report preview header
Screenshot 2024-03-05 at 23 34 11
Screenshot 2024-03-05 at 23 34 23

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as the tests.

QA Steps

  1. Log in to your account with the Expensify Card transaction ([email protected])
  2. Go to the workspace chat with the transaction (https://staging.new.expensify.com/r/4612388815642526. If the transaction is settled, please create another Expensify Card transaction)
  3. Verify the text on 3 places below correctly showing <requestor's name> spent

3a. Alternate text on LHN
Screenshot 2024-03-05 at 23 33 50

3b. Report preview
Screenshot 2024-03-05 at 23 33 56

3c. Money report preview header
Screenshot 2024-03-05 at 23 34 11
Screenshot 2024-03-05 at 23 34 23

  • 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 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.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

36186 Android 1
36186 Android 2
36186 Android 3
36186 Android 4

Android: mWeb Chrome

36186 mWeb:Chrome 1
36186 mWeb:Chrome 2
36186 mWeb:Chrome 3
36186 mWeb:Chrome 4

iOS: Native

36186 iOS 1
36186 iOS 2
36186 iOS 3
36186 iOS 4

iOS: mWeb Safari

36186 mWeb:Safari 1
36186 mWeb:Safari 2
36186 mWeb:Safari 3
36186 mWeb:Safari 4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

36186 Web 1
36186 Web 2
36186 Web 3

MacOS: Desktop

36186 Desktop 1
36186 Desktop 2
36186 Desktop 3

@mollfpr mollfpr requested a review from a team as a code owner March 5, 2024 16:52
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from aimane-chnaif and removed request for a team March 5, 2024 16:52
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 5, 2024

@aimane-chnaif 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]

Copy link
Contributor Author

@mollfpr mollfpr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

While working on the PR, I tried to create a util function to return the payer name based on the IOU report, but I noticed it's hard to read the code because we have separate checks for the verb key to combine them with the payer name.

To make matters things simple, I just update the variable that holds the payer name to correctly use the ownerAccountID in the individual function to give more idea and align with the logic for the verb key.

Also, I noticed that we don't need to check if it's a card transaction because I believe the check is already covered in hasNonReimbursableTransactions.

if (isApproved) {
return translate('iou.managerApproved', {manager: payerOrApproverName});
}
const managerName = isPolicyExpenseChat && !hasNonReimbursableTransactions ? ReportUtils.getPolicyName(chatReport) : ReportUtils.getDisplayNameForParticipant(managerID, true);
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The check !hasNonReimbursableTransactions is not needed here, so that's why I using the previous variable to get the payer name.

@@ -2090,7 +2089,8 @@ function getMoneyRequestReportName(report: OnyxEntry<Report>, policy: OnyxEntry<
return `${payerPaidAmountMessage} • ${Localize.translateLocal('iou.pending')}`;
}

if (hasNonReimbursableTransactions(report?.reportID)) {
if (!isSettled(report?.reportID) && hasNonReimbursableTransactions(report?.reportID)) {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

An issue I stumbled upon while working on the PR is that after the non-reimbursable transaction is paid and clicking on the report preview, the money report header still shows <name> spent instead of <name> paid.

Screen.Recording.2024-03-05.at.21.33.16.mp4

So adding the check if the transaction paid shows the spent verb.

@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: 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
payee.mov
payer.mov
MacOS: Desktop

@@ -2374,7 +2374,7 @@ function getReportPreviewMessage(
const containsNonReimbursable = hasNonReimbursableTransactions(report.reportID);
const totalAmount = getMoneyRequestSpendBreakdown(report).totalDisplaySpend;
const policyName = getPolicyName(report, false, policy);
const payerName = isExpenseReport(report) && !containsNonReimbursable ? policyName : getDisplayNameForParticipant(report.managerID, !isPreviewMessageForParentChatReport);
const payerName = isExpenseReport(report) ? policyName : getDisplayNameForParticipant(report.managerID, !isPreviewMessageForParentChatReport);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  • {workspace name} approved $xxx. (this branch)
Screenshot 2024-03-10 at 5 30 01 PM
  • {payer name} approved $xxx. (main)
Screenshot 2024-03-10 at 5 29 31 PM

I think {payer name} was existing bug (regression from #35529) and {workspace name} is correct.
@mollfpr can you confirm?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@mollfpr mollfpr Mar 12, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, I believe so!

@grgia Do you mind confirming if the above result is correct?

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from grgia March 12, 2024 12:37
@mollfpr
Copy link
Contributor Author

mollfpr commented Mar 14, 2024

Friendly bump @grgia

Copy link
Contributor

@grgia grgia left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I triggered a test build so we can more quickly test various cases of headers

@grgia
Copy link
Contributor

grgia commented Mar 18, 2024

@mollfpr @aimane-chnaif could you confirm if this case is also fixed by this PR?

#37838

Copy link
Contributor

@aimane-chnaif
Copy link
Contributor

aimane-chnaif commented Mar 19, 2024

@mollfpr @aimane-chnaif could you confirm if this case is also fixed by this PR?

#37838

yes exactly. It's 3c. Money report preview header in QA Steps

@grgia
Copy link
Contributor

grgia commented Mar 20, 2024

@mollfpr could you merge main?

@mollfpr
Copy link
Contributor Author

mollfpr commented Mar 20, 2024

Fixed the conflict!

@grgia
Copy link
Contributor

grgia commented Mar 22, 2024

Thank you @mollfpr, I'm just going to have a second pair of eyes take a look at the adhoc build before I merge :)

Copy link
Contributor

@grgia grgia left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

code LGTM, holding merge on extra internal testing

@kevinksullivan
Copy link
Contributor

Hmm how do I use the links here? It seems I don't have access

image

@kevinksullivan
Copy link
Contributor

I tested a card transaction on staging / reported on a free workspace and I see the correct person in the title ("Kevin"). Is that all we need to do to confirm this is working as expected?

image

@grgia grgia merged commit f2e4f55 into Expensify:main Mar 25, 2024
15 checks passed
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot added the Emergency label Mar 25, 2024
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 25, 2024

@grgia looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

@grgia grgia removed the Emergency label Mar 25, 2024
@grgia
Copy link
Contributor

grgia commented Mar 25, 2024

not sure what happened there

@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.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants