Follow ups to Broken Connection with direct feeds by VickyStash · Pull Request #57242 · Expensify/App

VickyStash · 2025-02-21T11:39:49Z

Explanation of Change

Fixes for broken connection violations display

Fixed Issues

$ #57162
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Pre-steps

Prepare 2 app accounts.
You need to ask @joekaufmanexpensify to help you set up these 2 account:

Account 1 should be added as an admin to the workspace with company cards set up. The card should be assigned to user 1.
Account 2 should be added as a member to the same workspace. The card should be assigned to user 2.
The connection should be broken after all.

Receipts to test with: you can find in slack.

Test steps:

Login as Account 1 (Admin). Create several scan expenses using the receipts mentioned above. See that after the scanning there are broken connection errors and you see it in the app.
Login as Account 2 (Member). Create several scan expenses using the receipts mentioned above. See that after scanning expenses have broken connection errors. Submit one of the expenses, make sure the full message and Mark as cash button are displayed.
From Account 1 (Admin): make sure you see broken connection violation errors for expenses created by Account 2. Approve one of the expenses of Account 2.
From Account 2 (Member): see that approved expense with broken connection violation error still shows the error message, but without mentioning mark as cash part. Mark as cash button should be hidden.

Offline tests

Same, as in the Tests section.

QA Steps

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Same, as in the Tests section.

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Admin view:

Member - processing view:

Member - approved view:

Member - open view:

Android: mWeb Chrome

Admin view:

Member - processing view:

Member - approved view:

Member - open view:

iOS: Native

Member - processing view:

Member - approved view:

Member - open view:

Admin view:

iOS: mWeb Safari

Member - open view:

Member - approved view:

Member - processing view:

Admin view:

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Member - processing view:

Member - approved view:

Member - open view:

Admin view:

MacOS: Desktop

Member - processing view:

Member - approved view:

Member - open view:

Admin view:

…se view

melvin-bot · 2025-02-24T11:02:25Z

@DylanDylann 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]

mountiny · 2025-02-24T12:06:17Z

@DylanDylann can you please complete the review here?

DylanDylann · 2025-02-25T09:31:37Z

@joekaufmanexpensify Could you help to set up my accounts to test this PR?
My admin acc: dylandylan9112+23000@gmail.com
My member acc: dylandylan9112+23100@gmail.com

github-actions · 2025-02-25T09:47:46Z

🚧 @mountiny has triggered a test build. You can view the workflow run here.

github-actions · 2025-02-25T10:30:21Z

🚧 @mountiny has triggered a test build. You can view the workflow run here.

github-actions · 2025-02-25T10:46:39Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, Desktop, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
❌ FAILED ❌	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/ios/57242/index.html
The QR code can't be generated, because the Android build failed
Desktop 💻	Web 🕸️
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/desktop/57242/NewExpensify.dmg	https://57242.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

joekaufmanexpensify · 2025-02-25T15:28:30Z

Login as Account 1 (Admin). Create several scan expenses using the receipts mentioned above. See that after the scanning there are broken connection errors and you see it in the app.

Confirmed! The violation is not live updating, but when you click into the expense, it is there for the admin viewing their own expenses.

2025-02-25_10-25-14.mp4

joekaufmanexpensify · 2025-02-25T15:34:58Z

Login as Account 2 (Member). Create several scan expenses using the receipts mentioned above. See that after scanning expenses have broken connection errors. Submit one of the expenses, make sure the full message and Mark as cash button are displayed.

Confirmed! Violation on open and processing expenses with mark as cash for both.

2025-02-25_10-33-39.mp4

From Account 2 (Member): see that approved expense with broken connection violation error still shows the error message, but without mentioning mark as cash part. Mark as cash button should be hidden.

Violation and no mark as cash on approved.

2025-02-25_10-34-21.mp4

joekaufmanexpensify · 2025-02-25T15:39:43Z

From Account 1 (Admin): make sure you see broken connection violation errors for expenses created by Account 2. Approve one of the expenses of Account 2.

Confirmed. Admin can see violation on employee's expense on an open report.

2025-02-25_10-37-46.mp4

VickyStash · 2025-02-26T08:02:37Z

Thank you @joekaufmanexpensify!
@DylanDylann, could you please review the code?

DylanDylann · 2025-02-26T08:19:32Z

Sure, I am on it

DylanDylann · 2025-02-26T10:31:08Z

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

1. In the employee view

In the employee view after approval

Android: mWeb Chrome

In the employee view

In the employee view after approval

Screen.Recording.2025-02-26.at.21.22.25.mov

iOS: Native

In the employee view

In the employee view after approval

Screen.Recording.2025-02-26.at.21.19.43.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

1. In the employee view

In the employee view after approval

Screen.Recording.2025-02-26.at.21.21.13.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

In the employee view

In the employee view after approval

Screen.Recording.2025-02-26.at.17.54.30.mov

In the admin view

MacOS: Desktop

In the employee view

In the employee view after approval

Screen.Recording.2025-02-26.at.21.21.40.mov

In the admin view

DylanDylann · 2025-02-26T10:49:06Z

src/libs/TransactionUtils/index.ts

+        if (!isPolicyAdmin(policy) || isCurrentUserSubmitter(report?.reportID)) {
+            return true;
+        }
+        return isOpenExpenseReport(report) || (isProcessingReport(report) && isInstantSubmitEnabled(policy));


@VickyStash Could you help to explain why do we need to add isInstantSubmitEnabled condition?

As I understand, policy?.autoReportingFrequency === CONST.POLICY.AUTO_REPORTING_FREQUENCIES.INSTANT means that we toggle off "Delay submission"

@DylanDylann Let me double check it to be sure!

@DylanDylann That's mentioned in the doc:

Admins can see this violation on open reports (which makes it clear why the submit button is either hidden, or submitting splits some expenses to a new report) and processing reports with instant submit (which clarifies why the approve/pay button is hidden, or why taking that action splits some expenses to a new report.)

Admins can’t see this violation on processing reports (with delayed submission), approved reports, or paid reports (same as OldDot.)

mountiny

Thanks! One questions but please add it as a follow up

mountiny · 2025-02-27T00:08:40Z

src/libs/TransactionUtils/index.ts

    const brokenConnectionViolations = violations.filter((violation) => isBrokenConnectionViolation(violation));
-    return brokenConnectionViolations.length > 0 && (!isPolicyAdmin(policy) || isOpenExpenseReport(report) || (isProcessingReport(report) && isInstantSubmitEnabled(policy)));
+
+    if (brokenConnectionViolations.length > 0) {


@VickyStash Could you please write unit test covering the shouldShowBrokenConnectionViolation logic?

@mountiny I've prepared a follow-up PR: #57542

OSBotify · 2025-02-27T00:18:35Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

github-actions · 2025-02-27T21:07:38Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.1.7-1 🚀

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

kavimuru · 2025-02-27T21:21:20Z

@joekaufmanexpensify Looks like our applause QA team could not test this PR. Could this be verified internally?

joekaufmanexpensify · 2025-02-28T15:22:39Z

@kavimuru Yeah, this one should be internal QA. I will QA it now and then mark it on the checklist when done.

joekaufmanexpensify · 2025-02-28T15:46:05Z

QA'ed on staging and all looks good!

mountiny · 2025-03-02T22:53:06Z

Thanks!

github-actions · 2025-03-03T16:43:52Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 9.1.7-2 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	true ❌
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	failure ❌
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	failure ❌

VickyStash added 4 commits February 21, 2025 12:29

Fix violation display for admins; fix violation display for one expen…

368294d

…se view

Fix broken connection violation text display for members

7f19faa

Update conditions of showing mark as cash button

d17898b

Minor fix

0f20a32

VickyStash mentioned this pull request Feb 21, 2025

[Due for payment 2025-03-11] [Due for payment 2025-03-10] Follow ups to Broken Connection with direct feeds #57162

Closed

VickyStash added 2 commits February 21, 2025 17:42

Fix broken connection message for admin

a614465

Code clean-up

7e6f6b5

VickyStash changed the title ~~[WIP] Follow ups to Broken Connection with direct feeds~~ Follow ups to Broken Connection with direct feeds Feb 24, 2025

VickyStash marked this pull request as ready for review February 24, 2025 11:02

VickyStash requested a review from a team as a code owner February 24, 2025 11:02

melvin-bot bot requested review from DylanDylann and removed request for a team February 24, 2025 11:02

mountiny assigned VickyStash Feb 24, 2025

mountiny added the Ready To Build label Feb 25, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

DylanDylann reviewed Feb 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

DylanDylann approved these changes Feb 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from mountiny February 26, 2025 14:50

mountiny approved these changes Feb 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

mountiny merged commit 971b380 into Expensify:main Feb 27, 2025
24 of 27 checks passed

VickyStash mentioned this pull request Feb 27, 2025

[No QA] Follow-up: add unit test for shouldShowBrokenConnectionViolation function #57542

Merged

50 tasks

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Feb 27, 2025

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2025-02-27 #57563

Closed

40 tasks

Conversation

VickyStash commented Feb 21, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 24, 2025

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Feb 24, 2025

Uh oh!

DylanDylann commented Feb 25, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 25, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

github-actions bot commented Feb 25, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 25, 2025

Uh oh!

joekaufmanexpensify commented Feb 25, 2025

Uh oh!

joekaufmanexpensify commented Feb 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

joekaufmanexpensify commented Feb 25, 2025

Uh oh!

VickyStash commented Feb 26, 2025

Uh oh!

DylanDylann commented Feb 26, 2025

Uh oh!

DylanDylann commented Feb 26, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

DylanDylann Feb 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

DylanDylann Feb 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

VickyStash Feb 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

VickyStash Feb 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mountiny Feb 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

VickyStash Feb 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Feb 27, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 27, 2025

Uh oh!

kavimuru commented Feb 27, 2025

Uh oh!

joekaufmanexpensify commented Feb 28, 2025

Uh oh!

joekaufmanexpensify commented Feb 28, 2025

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Mar 2, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 3, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

VickyStash commented Feb 21, 2025 •

edited

Loading

joekaufmanexpensify commented Feb 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

DylanDylann commented Feb 26, 2025 •

edited

Loading