Fix thread parent message comment linking bug

[FitseTLT]

Details

1. The expected behaviour has changed from OP of the issue so now we navigate to the parent report and highlight on the parent message according to this comment
2. I also fixed a regression from Fix cannot clear error of modified action in one transaction report #39474 which caused reportAction used in context menu to be null as it passes the wrong originalReportID when IOU type report action is displayed as the parent message in a thread.

Fixed Issues

$ #36057
PROPOSAL: #36057 (comment)

Tests

1. Tap on a report
2. Send any message
3. Long press the message and select reply in thread
4. Send a reply
5. Long press parent message and copy link
6. Paste it in compose and send the message
7. Tap on the link
8. Verify that the the parent message is displayed highlighted inside its parent report on which it originally belongs to (not the current thread report)

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

same here

QA Steps

same here

• 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(themeColors.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

nat.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

and.web.mp4

iOS: Native

ios.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

2024-04-17.14-46-38.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

2024-04-17.14-31-45.mp4

[melvin-bot]

@abdulrahuman5196 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]

[FitseTLT]

Bump @abdulrahuman5196

[abdulrahuman5196]

Hi, Sorry for the delay. Will work on review.

[abdulrahuman5196]

Checking now

[abdulrahuman5196]

Checking again. Couldn't complete last time

[abdulrahuman5196]

why is transactionThreadReportID computation blocked under this flag? Shouldn't it break for calls of getOriginalReportID since only one place we are sending true and others will be false by default?

And the change here is different than your original proposal #36057 (comment), could you provide information on how this change is expected to fix the issue?

@FitseTLT

[FitseTLT]

@abdulrahuman5196 I have already commented an explanation for both in Details section on the PR description.

[abdulrahuman5196]

@FitseTLT
This is the from the details section

The expected behaviour has changed from OP of the issue so now we navigate to the parent report and highlight on the parent message according to this #36057 (comment)

This is the expected behaviour I get from the issue, but not sure on how it is being fixed with this PR. Because the code change in the proposal is different from the change in this PR. #36057 (comment). Do let me know if there was a different discussion.

I also fixed a regression from
#39474 which caused reportAction used in context menu to be null as it passes the wrong originalReportID when IOU type report action is displayed as the parent message in a thread.

What is the UX regression on this issue?, to check if its fixed? I don't see any regression statement in that PR as well its relevant GH. Do add those in test steps if its a specific case.

[FitseTLT]

This is the expected behaviour I get from the issue, but not sure on how it is being fixed with this PR. Because the code change in the proposal is different from the change in this PR. #36057 (comment). Do let me know if there was a different discussion.

#36057 (comment) is where the expectation changed that's why the pr is different from the proposal.

What is the UX regression on this issue?, to check if its fixed? I don't see any regression statement in that PR as well its relevant GH. Do add those in test steps if its a specific case.

1. On a collect workspace: Create a money request and ensure it is the only transaction in the expense report
2. On the transaction thread send a message
3. "Reply in thread" with it
4. Now on the new thread right click on the request preview parent message and copy link
5. Paste the link

Because of the regression caused from #39474 the reportActionID part of the link will be undefined. But the problem it caused is wider as it makes the all context menu operations not to work (like copy to clipboard )

[FitseTLT]

Looks like #41954 has overlapped and fixed the bug.