Fix the optimistic data of hold action isn't consistent with backend data

[nkdengineer]

Details

Fix the optimistic data of hold action isn't consistent with backend data

Fixed Issues

$ #38583
PROPOSAL: #38583 (comment)

Tests

1. Go to WS chat
2. Create a money request
3. Go to transaction thread report of the request
4. Click on three-dot icon in the header > Hold request
5. Enter a hold reason and submit
6. Verify that the hold reason is always below the hold action

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as above

QA Steps

1. Go to WS chat
2. Create a money request
3. Go to transaction thread report of the request
4. Click on three-dot icon in the header > Hold request
5. Enter a hold reason and submit
6. Verify that the hold reason is always below the hold action

• 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 either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • 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 UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design 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

Screen.Recording.2024-03-26.at.13.04.54.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2024-03-26.at.13.03.48.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2024-03-26.at.13.05.57.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-03-26.at.13.02.50.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-03-26.at.13.00.31.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2024-03-26.at.13.11.11.mov

[melvin-bot]

@grgia 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]

[nkdengineer]

@grgia Please ignore this PR, I missed the issue link when I ready the PR. Sorry for inconvenience.

[nkdengineer]

@mkhutornyi #38738, A recent BE change that separate the hold action to two action one is the hold action that display Held this request, one is the reason comment. After that I found the data still not consistent and has two problem:

1. The hold reason display above the hold action briefly, the RCA is the created time of two action is the same and I fixed it here

2. The hold reason action is grey out briefly, the RCA is in optimistic data the action name is HOLDCOMMENT but BE returns it as ADDCOMMENT. I want to confirm what is the correct action name of this before moving this forward

cc @neil-marcellini Can you please confirm the point 2 above?

[neil-marcellini]

I'm confused. The solution here doesn't seem to match the proposal at all. Would you please explain why? Also why are we subtracting 1ms from the created time?

[neil-marcellini]

@mkhutornyi #38738, A recent BE change that separate the hold action to two action one is the hold action that display Held this request, one is the reason comment. After that I found the data still not consistent and has two problem:

1. The hold reason display above the hold action briefly, the RCA is the created time of two action is the same and I fixed it here
2. The hold reason action is grey out briefly, the RCA is in optimistic data the action name is HOLDCOMMENT but BE returns it as ADDCOMMENT. I want to confirm what is the correct action name of this before moving this forward

cc @neil-marcellini Can you please confirm the point 2 above?

Oh I missed this message haha. Ok, I think that all makes sense. I would trust what the backend returns generally, and use the ADDCOMMENT action name. However I'm not sure. @robertjchen since you implemented this on the backend, what do you think the action name should be?

Rather than subtracting 1ms from the hold report action I would add 1ms to the second one, since that feels more like how it should work in reality.

[robertjchen]

Updated the backend to be HOLDCOMMENT, that change should be going out later today 👍

[nkdengineer]

@robertjchen I tested and saw that hold comment in backend is updated to HOLDCOMMENT, but we have another problem now. GetNewestAction API returns HOLDCOMMENT with message as empty array now.

Screen.Recording.2024-04-03.at.13.13.33.mov

[robertjchen]

Hm, the only thing we changed was the reportAction type. I see that the comment is under originalMessage > html in the Onyx data.

Perhaps there is there additional formatting/organization applied to the original message for ADDCOMMENT types that we are no longer applying now that we switched to HOLDCOMMENT? Is there something on the frontend that handles this? 🤔

[nkdengineer]

@robertjchen Actually, in frontend we are getting the hold reason via action.message[0].text and now the app crash after we hold the request because message is an empty array.

[thesahindia]

It seems to take a little while before the styles are applied to the hold reason text.

Screen.Recording.2024-04-09.at.11.52.32.PM.mov

Thoughts? @neil-marcellini @nkdengineer

[nkdengineer]

It seems to take a little while before the styles are applied to the hold reason text.

The reason is actionName of hold action is HOLDCOMMENT in optimistic data but BE return actionName as ADDCOMMENT cc @robertjchen .

[thesahindia]

@robertjchen thoughts^

[thesahindia]

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 either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • 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 UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design 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

Screen.Recording.2024-04-15.at.4.21.12.PM.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2024-04-15.at.4.24.02.PM.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2024-04-09.at.11.44.02.PM.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-04-09.at.11.46.02.PM.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-04-09.at.11.52.32.PM.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2024-04-15.at.4.14.26.PM.mov

[robertjchen]

The reason is actionName of hold action is HOLDCOMMENT in optimistic data but BE return actionName as ADDCOMMENT

Ah, the backend was updated two weeks ago to switch it back to ADDCOMMENT since HOLDCOMMENT was causing issues.

[nkdengineer]

@robertjchen So we will update front-end to ADDCOMMENT or waiting for back-end fix again.

[robertjchen]

@nkdengineer Looks like we'll be permanently using ADDCOMMENT for this moving forward 👍

[nkdengineer]

@thesahindia Updated the type of hold report comment action base on this #38980 (comment).

[thesahindia]

LGTM!

[neil-marcellini]

Thanks, let's merge

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/neil-marcellini in version: 1.4.63-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.4.63-21 🚀

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