Skip to content

Fix: Unable to scroll troubleshoot panel#64717

Merged
amyevans merged 15 commits intoExpensify:mainfrom
nyomanjyotisa:issue-64550
Jul 11, 2025
Merged

Fix: Unable to scroll troubleshoot panel#64717
amyevans merged 15 commits intoExpensify:mainfrom
nyomanjyotisa:issue-64550

Conversation

@nyomanjyotisa
Copy link
Member

@nyomanjyotisa nyomanjyotisa commented Jun 23, 2025

Explanation of Change

This PR addresses several issues related to the Test Tools modal

Fixed Issues

$ #64550
#64431
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

Same as QA Steps

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as QA Steps

QA Steps

  1. Log in with any account
  2. Open the test tools modal by performing a four-finger tap on mobile or CMD+D on desktop
  3. Verify that the troubleshoot panel is scrollable
  4. Enable “Record Troubleshoot Data”
  5. Click on “View console” button
  6. Verify the test tools modal closed and console page displayed correctly
  • 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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
  • 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 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 used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it 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.ts 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.
  • I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
  • 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
Android-Native.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
Android-mWeb.Chrome.mp4
iOS: Native
iOS-Native.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
iOS-mWeb.Safari.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
MacOS-Chrome.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
MacOS-Desktop.mp4

@nyomanjyotisa nyomanjyotisa marked this pull request as ready for review June 25, 2025 07:43
@nyomanjyotisa nyomanjyotisa requested a review from a team as a code owner June 25, 2025 07:43
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from QichenZhu and removed request for a team June 25, 2025 07:43
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jun 25, 2025

@QichenZhu 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]

@nyomanjyotisa nyomanjyotisa requested a review from a team as a code owner June 26, 2025 08:20
@nyomanjyotisa
Copy link
Member Author

Here is the summary of the changes in the PR:

  1. Fixed scrolling issue on native platforms by wrapping the TestToolMenu with PressableWithoutFeedback
  2. Fixed debug console issue on iOS native by dismissing the test tool modal before opening the console page
  3. Fixed navigation for the test tool modal and debug console page
  4. Updated the height of the test tool modal to a fixed number

cc @hungvu193

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

hungvu193 commented Jun 30, 2025

Oh, thanks for the tag here @nyomanjyotisa. This PR is totally slipped from my list 🤦

const height = isAuthenticated ? defaultHeight : '55%';
const defaultHeight = shouldUseNarrowLayout ? '78%' : 654;
const height = isAuthenticated ? defaultHeight : 400;

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder, what's the issue with using percent? And what's the reason for 654 and 400 number?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Since the Use profiling and Client side logging menu items have been removed and replaced with Record Troubleshoot Data, the default content in the modal is no longer enough to fill 75% of the screen height. This results in an empty gap at the bottom of the modal

Before After
image image

We chose 654 and 400 (should have been 398) as the fixed height values because the default content height of the test tools modal is 654 when the user is authenticated

image

and 398 when the user is not authenticated

image

We also kept the 78% height for narrow layouts because on mWeb Safari, setting the modal height to 654px causes it to take up the entire screen

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks. Let me double check.

Also I'm facing issue on Android app, the splash screen is stuck and I couldn't verify the bugs. I'll try again for a while.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there a Slack convo you can link for posterity where the 654 and 400 numbers were discussed/chosen?

Could you also add comments in code briefly explaining the reasoning for each number?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There isn’t a specific Slack conversation where 654 and 400 were discussed—these numbers were derived by visually inspecting the modal content height after the removal of the Use profiling and Client side logging menu items

I’ll add comments to explain this for reference

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

hungvu193 commented Jul 1, 2025

I think this can be a bug. When I press back from Console page on Android, I'm navigated to Troubleshoot screen.

Screen.Recording.2025-07-01.at.17.41.39.mov

here's on the web, which looks expected to me:

Screen.Recording.2025-07-01.at.17.43.38.mov

@nyomanjyotisa
Copy link
Member Author

nyomanjyotisa commented Jul 2, 2025

When I press back from Console page on Android, I'm navigated to Troubleshoot screen

I think this happens because when we access the test tools modal directly via link (/test-tools) instead of CMD + D or four finger tap, we don't have backTo param so it went to troubleshoot page stack
We can use ROUTES.HOME as a default backTo value when none is provided

Android-Native.mp4

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks. Looks much better!

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

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 that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
  • I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • Android: HybridApp
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: HybridApp
    • 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 there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
  • 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 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.ts 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.
  • For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this flow.
  • 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: HybridApp
Android.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
mChrome.mov
iOS: HybridApp
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-07-03.at.15.55.10.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-07-03.at.15.52.25.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Desk.mov

@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jul 3, 2025

We did not find an internal engineer to review this PR, trying to assign a random engineer to #64550 as well as to this PR... Please reach out for help on Slack if no one gets assigned!

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from neil-marcellini July 3, 2025 09:34
@neil-marcellini neil-marcellini requested a review from a team July 3, 2025 21:19
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from amyevans and removed request for a team July 3, 2025 21:19
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jul 3, 2025

@amyevans 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]

@neil-marcellini neil-marcellini requested review from a team and removed request for neil-marcellini July 3, 2025 21:20
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from neil-marcellini July 3, 2025 21:20
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jul 3, 2025

@neil-marcellini 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]

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team July 3, 2025 21:20
@neil-marcellini
Copy link
Contributor

I have not been able to get to this pull request review yet. The past two weeks have been very busy and I've been focusing on internal PR reviews.

I'm going to be out of office July 4th through 16th. Working 0%. Therefore, I have reassigned this to another internal engineer who can move it forward while I'm gone. Thank you 🙇

@neil-marcellini neil-marcellini removed their request for review July 3, 2025 21:22
Copy link
Contributor

@amyevans amyevans left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

One small request, thanks!

const height = isAuthenticated ? defaultHeight : '55%';
const defaultHeight = shouldUseNarrowLayout ? '78%' : 654;
const height = isAuthenticated ? defaultHeight : 400;

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there a Slack convo you can link for posterity where the 654 and 400 numbers were discussed/chosen?

Could you also add comments in code briefly explaining the reasoning for each number?

@amyevans amyevans merged commit 684e45f into Expensify:main Jul 11, 2025
17 checks passed
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/amyevans in version: 9.1.80-0 🚀

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

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.1.80-8 🚀

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants