Stop displaying User info in SearchResults row if user missing or fake by Kicu · Pull Request #49158 · Expensify/App

Kicu · 2024-09-13T09:58:10Z

Details

as agreed in a slack thread (in the issue) we are displaying empty "user info" cell in case we're missing user, or we have __fake__ user data
although the main fix is inside UserInfoCell I made the code handling managerID inside SearchUtils to be more explicit. In case we get managerID === 0 in special cases, we now handle this with fallback

Note: I was not actually able to reproduce the state of "unsubmitted Expensify Card transaction" (I don't know how) so I did not get the __fake__ user name; I tested this PR by manually making SearchUtils.getTransactionsSections() return some missing user data.

Fixed Issues

$ #48582
PROPOSAL:

Tests

verify that __fake__ is not displayed in user cell in case of missing results
test with unsubmitted Expensify Card transaction

Offline tests

QA Steps

Create an ECard transaction
While the transaction is pending, add it to an OpenReport
Open the search page
Verify that the transaction only has a From but the arrow icon is not there and To column is empty

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

melvin-bot · 2024-09-13T10:16:36Z

@ikevin127 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]

Kicu · 2024-09-13T10:18:03Z

@luacmartins @puneetlath in regards to this conversation: https://swmansion.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1725454490800639

Can you drop a list of steps to reproduce this case where a user can have unsubmitted transaction and gets a managerID = 0.
I'm unable to do so, however this fix should work regardless.

luacmartins · 2024-09-13T13:54:24Z

I think the steps is something like:

Pre-condition:

Create an ECard transaction
While the transaction is pending, add it to an OpenReport
Open the search page
Verify that the transaction only has a From and the arrow icon and To columns are empty

luacmartins

LGTM

ikevin127 · 2024-09-14T00:40:41Z

src/components/SelectionList/Search/UserInfoCell.tsx

    const {isLargeScreenWidth} = useResponsiveLayout();
    const avatarURL = participant?.avatar;

+    if (displayName === CONST.REPORT.OWNER_EMAIL_FAKE || displayName === '') {


I know that the transactionItem.managerID === 0 check, which if true returns emptyPersonalDetails would always return the displayName as empty string, which would make the next paragraph non-valid but I thought I should mention it for the case (not sure it will ever exist) where transactionItem.managerID !== 0 but the displayName is __fake__.

Note: In this case we should also ensure the shouldDisplayArrowIcon is handled accordingly.

I noticed in the Slack conversation screenshot (see below) that the __fake__ displayName was lowercase and here we're checking for equality between displayName (which can be lowercase) and CONST.REPORT.OWNER_EMAIL_FAKE which is __FAKE__ (uppercase) - which might cause an edge case where this logic won't return early because both checks will fail.

As a fix I'd recommend either uppercasing displayName for this check, or lowercasing both.

@luacmartins Wdyt ?

Ah nice catch. Yea, we should make the comparison case insensitive

makes sense and I can update, but then Im curious why we get the lowercase __fake__ in the first place? Is it backend that produces this value? In the App I get 0 results when searching for __fake__.

ikevin127 · 2024-09-14T00:55:40Z

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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

ikevin127 · 2024-09-14T01:28:58Z

Will 🟢 Approve as soon as observation in #49158 (comment) is addressed.

Kicu · 2024-09-16T09:15:25Z

@ikevin127 all done, now fake should be correctly handled.
(Sorry for the rebase + force-push, I was working on some other unfinished PR and also rebased this one by mistake instead of merging. Nothing was changed in previous commits, only new commit added)

ikevin127

Thanks for addressing the comment, LGTM 🚀

OSBotify · 2024-09-17T20:52:21Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.0.37-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2024-09-19T23:34:39Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/grgia in version: 9.0.38-4 🚀

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

Kicu marked this pull request as ready for review September 13, 2024 10:16

Kicu requested a review from a team as a code owner September 13, 2024 10:16

melvin-bot bot requested review from ikevin127 and removed request for a team September 13, 2024 10:16

luacmartins previously approved these changes Sep 13, 2024

View reviewed changes

ikevin127 reviewed Sep 14, 2024

View reviewed changes

Kicu added 2 commits September 16, 2024 10:40

Stop displaying User info in SearchResults row if user missing or fake

1ec92a5

Correctly handle __fake__ user display name

77bc236

Kicu dismissed luacmartins’s stale review via 77bc236 September 16, 2024 09:13

Kicu force-pushed the kicu/48582-fix-report-fake branch from 61c1c2f to 77bc236 Compare September 16, 2024 09:13

ikevin127 approved these changes Sep 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from luacmartins September 16, 2024 19:09

luacmartins approved these changes Sep 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

luacmartins merged commit 3b850e8 into Expensify:main Sep 16, 2024

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Sep 17, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-09-17 #49356

Closed

40 tasks

Conversation

Kicu commented Sep 13, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Sep 13, 2024

Uh oh!

Kicu commented Sep 13, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

luacmartins commented Sep 13, 2024

Uh oh!

luacmartins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ikevin127 Sep 14, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

luacmartins Sep 15, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Kicu Sep 16, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ikevin127 commented Sep 14, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

ikevin127 commented Sep 14, 2024

Uh oh!

Kicu commented Sep 16, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ikevin127 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Sep 17, 2024

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Sep 19, 2024

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Kicu commented Sep 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Kicu commented Sep 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

ikevin127 Sep 14, 2024 •

edited

Loading

ikevin127 commented Sep 14, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Kicu commented Sep 16, 2024 •

edited

Loading