Bring back new sign-in page

[mateuuszzzzz]

This reverts commit 4281f3c.

Explanation of Change

This PR simply reverts a revert of new SignInPage

Fixed Issues

$ #49844

MOBILE-EXPENSIFY: https://github.com/Expensify/Mobile-Expensify/pull/13603

Tests

Please thoroughly test these cases, these changes have far reaching changes to authentication.

Base information to every flow:

Redirection tests apply to HybridApp, for web you should remain on the current URL

The flow is based on NVP tryNewDot value, we have two possible scenarios to test

• tryNewDot is properly set

1. Log out from ND
2. Log in using any flows bellow
3. Verify that you end up in ND (dismissed == false)
4. Move to OD using Switch to Expensify Classic button
5. Log out from OD
6. Verify that you end up in ND sign in page and the transition is seamless (no bootsplash and no white screen)
7. Log in with the same account
8. Verify you end up in OD (dismissed == true)

• tryNewDot is undefined. This state can be achieved by having old classic account or manually setting await NVP.set("tryNewDot", undefined); in Expenisfy classic on web.

1. Open app
2. Try to log in using preset account described above and any flow
3. Verify that you user is moved straight to OD and Try New Expensify button is no visible
4. Log out
5. Verify that you end up in ND sign in page and the transition is seamless (no bootsplash and no white screen)

Main flow:

1. Provide email
2. Enter magic code

Main flow new Account:

1. Provide new email
2. Press Join
3. Verify that onboarding starts
4. Verify that onboarding cannot be dismissed by pressing hardware back button.

SAML Magic code

1. Provide email that uses SAML
2. Press Use magic code
3. Enter magic code

SAML single sign on

1. Provide email that uses SAML
2. Press single sign-on
3. Login via SAML
4. Verify that app opens properly and not inside WebView

Google sign-in Apple sign-in:

• Both flows have different implementation depending on OS and need to be tested exhaustively
• Verify that no errors or Growls appear.

2FA:

1. Log in to ND.
2. Add 2FA to the account
3. Sign out
4. Login again using the authenticator app

Travel, OD <-> ND switch etc
Verify that:

1. Travel from OD work according to [HybridApp] Allow classic experience users to use NewDot travel page #49602 (comment)
2. After sign-in ND share extension works properly
3. That changing copilot in OD/ND changes copilot in other app.
4. When changing copilot in ND no navigation happens
5. User with tryNewDot can transition between OD and ND.
6. Deeplinks navigate to appropriate app depending on the link
7. Verify that shortcuts work and navigate to app depending on where user is logged.

Offline tests

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

• 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: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

[github-actions]

⚠️ This PR is possibly changing native code and/or updating libraries, it may cause problems with HybridApp. Please check if any patch updates are required in the HybridApp repo and run an AdHoc build to verify that HybridApp will not break. Ask Contributor Plus for help if you are not sure how to handle this. ⚠️

[melvin-bot]

@inimaga 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]

[Julesssss]

Holding for now

[Julesssss]

I had success retesting the feature on a locally signed release build. I think we can prep to attempt another release.

[github-actions]

🚧 @Julesssss has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

[mateuuszzzzz]

@Julesssss what are the plans regarding 2FA issue? What will hit staging first? Backend changes or SignInPage PR?

[Julesssss]

the plans regarding 2FA issue? What will hit staging first? Backend changes or SignInPage PR?

The 2FA issue should have hit prod late on Wednesday so we should be good 👍

I'm just awaiting results from QA AdHoc retesting now. We also have some minor prettier diff and some conflicts

[github-actions]

🚧 @Julesssss has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, Desktop, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #64786 Mobile-Expensify PR Expensify/Mobile-Expensify#13603.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/android/64786/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/ios/64786/index.html

Desktop 💻	Web 🕸️
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/desktop/64786/NewExpensify.dmg	https://64786.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[isagoico]

Ad-hoc testing for this build is complete 🎉
We did not find any issue directly related to the ad-hoc build.

Additionally, here are the retest request for the following issues:

• ⚠️ Create Account - Interact with Magic Link not added magic code for login #64684 - Reproduction was blocked because the magic link opens mWeb instead of the app (this issue). It's unclear if the issue is still present or not.
• ❌ [Hold #49844] [$250] HybridApp - Can't validate the account of a new sign-up on a controlled private domain #55771 - Was reproducible on both Android and iOS. iOS video here and Android vid here
• 🟢 [HOLD 49844] Android - App returns to 2FA login page after clear cache and restart #64114 - Was not reproducible 🎉

[mateuuszzzzz]

First two issues are addressed, @isagoico regarding Android, I think you need to manually specify in system settings which urls are supported by the app.

In case of iOS adhoc builds, it is simply misconfigured, thus it doesn't work.

Here we don't have adhoc app id listed so it cannot be handled by the OS. @Julesssss is this expected?

EDIT: Maybe at least staging urls should support adhoc

[Julesssss]

@isagoico regarding Android, I think you need to manually specify in system settings which urls are supported by the app.

Yeah, Marcin just reminded me: 'I believe we can verify android deeplinks by enabling them in the phone settings. Settings -> Apps -> Expensify Adhoc -> default -> enable all links'.

However I also think we may need to merge main first as this PR was just merged and contains some fixes.

Here we don't have adhoc app id listed so it cannot be handled by the OS. @Julesssss is this expected?
EDIT: Maybe at least staging urls should support adhoc

Yeah I agree. I'll look into this now.

[Julesssss]

Merging. Lets keep an eye out for any issues that arise on staging.

[Julesssss]

@mateuuszzzzz testing well on locally signed release builds. We can skip Apple AdHoc deep links for now and test on prod/staging.

[Julesssss]

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: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 9.1.74-2 🚀

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

[luacmartins]

@Julesssss can you confirm if this is expected? #65369

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 9.1.74-10 🚀

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