fix: tag name in RHP is not correct

[tienifr]

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #37783
PROPOSAL: #37783 (comment)

Tests

Precondition:

• User is an employee of Collect workspace.
• The Collect workspace has dependant multilevel tag set up. (details here for how to setup)
• The multilevel tag is as follow:
  First level: State
  Second level: Region

1. Go to workspace chat.
2. Create a manual request with first and second level of tag.
3. Go to request details page.
4. Click the first level tag (State).
5. Click the second level tag (Region).
6. When the respective level tag is opened, the RHP will show the correct tag name (Step 4 and 5).

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Precondition:

• User is an employee of Collect workspace.
• The Collect workspace has dependant multilevel tag set up. (details here for how to setup)
• The multilevel tag is as follow:
  First level: State
  Second level: Region

1. Go to workspace chat.
2. Create a manual request with first and second level of tag.
3. Go to request details page.
4. Click the first level tag (State).
5. Click the second level tag (Region).
6. When the respective level tag is opened, the RHP will show the correct tag name (Step 4 and 5).

• 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.16.42.12.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2024-03-26.at.16.36.43.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2024-03-26.at.16.43.44.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-03-26.at.16.39.06.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-03-26.at.16.25.11.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2024-03-26.at.16.29.03.mov

[melvin-bot]

@ntdiary 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]

[ntdiary]

Under review, I'm investigating the index here.

App/src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepTag.js

Line 102 in d0a78c8

const tag = TransactionUtils.getTag(currentTransaction, tagListIndex);

App/src/libs/TransactionUtils.ts

Line 396 in d0a78c8

return tagsArray[tagIndex] ?? '';

[tienifr]

@ntdiary In the case you mentioned here, it works properly in both main branch and this branch.

• Main branch: We call TransactionUtils.getTag(currentTransaction, tagListIndex) with tagListIndex is ordered (by orderWeight) index
• This branch: We call TransactionUtils.getTag(currentTransaction, tagListIndex) with tagListIndex is orderWeight

[ntdiary]

This branch: We call TransactionUtils.getTag(currentTransaction, tagListIndex) with tagListIndex is orderWeight

Yesterday, while adjusting the tags order in oldDot, I encountered a scenario where the weight was only 0 / 2 / 3 (missing 1), so I was curious if there would be an issue here. However, I haven't been able to reproduce it today. BTW, I find the colon storage of tags a bit strange, but that's beyond the scope of this PR. 😂

[tienifr]

I encountered a scenario where the weight was only 0 / 2 / 3

I am trying to reproduce it

[tienifr]

@ntdiary I just merged main. And still cannot reproduce this

[ntdiary]

@ntdiary I just merged main. And still cannot reproduce this

@tienifr, thank you very much for your patience! It's strange, I wasn't able to reproduce it again either.

Additionally, @NikkiWines, PR #38881 seems to have fixed issue #37783 as well, so continuing this PR might not make much sense. If possible, maybe we can offer some compensation to @tienifr and then close this issue? As for the replacement of tagIndex with orderWeight or even the tag data formatting in Onyx, it might require a more comprehensive plan or timing, just focusing on the getTagListName or IOURequestStepTag for now doesn't seem sufficient. Finally, I'm also open to get more inputs. :)

We have some files where tagIndex is used:

[NikkiWines]

Ah yep, so there was an effective dupe of the issue - that's definitely frustrating. I'll start an internal discussion on compensation since work was done here.

[tienifr]

@NikkiWines @ntdiary Besides fixing the main issue, my solution also uses the orderWeight as the id to put in the route instead of tagIndex. Should we proceed with it?

[NikkiWines]

my solution also uses the orderWeight as the id to put in the route instead of tagIndex.

I do still like the idea of updating our usage of tagIndex as I feel like otherwise we're opening ourselves up to re-experiencing this kind of bug.

Let me double check with the team and I'll get back to you tomorrow on whether or not to proceed. Otherwise we can provide 50% compensation for the investment into the issue and time-spent 🙇

[NikkiWines]

Sorry for the delay here - I've got consensus that we should move forward with the change to use orderWeight

[tienifr]

@ntdiary Please help review the PR again based on comment. Thanks

[ntdiary]

Sorry for the delay here - I've got consensus that we should move forward with the change to use orderWeight

@ntdiary Please help review the PR again based on comment. Thanks

Great, will review again. :)

[ntdiary]

    return Object.values(policyTagList).find((policy) => policy.orderWeight === orderWeight)?.name ?? '';

@tienifr, I think your previous code would be more semantically and functionally appropriate.
In addition, we can also comment, currently, the orderWeight and tagIndex values are the same, and we want to migrate from tagIndex to orderWeight, and finally attach the discussion link. :)

[tienifr]

@ntdiary, I believe adding a comment is unnecessary as the function is straightforward enough to understand on its own.

[ntdiary]

policyTagList ?? {}
@tienifr, eh , why do we add ?? here ? I think if policyTagList is undefined or null, it should have returned early in the above condition. 🤔

[tienifr]

Ah, That makes sense. I updated

[ntdiary]

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

38988-android-native.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

38988-android-chrome.mp4

iOS: Native

38988-ios-native.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

38988-ios-safari.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

38988-web.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

38988-desktop.mp4

[ntdiary]

LGTM. :)

[NikkiWines]

Looks good, one minor naming request

[tienifr]

I am testing again after merging main.

[tienifr]

@NikkiWines I tested and it worked well

[NikkiWines]

[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/NikkiWines 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 ✅