[NoQA] Category upgrade path#69878
Conversation
melvin-bot
bot
requested review from
parasharrajat
and removed request for
a team
|
@parasharrajat 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] |
|
@parasharrajat FYI: not sure if you will also run into this problem and if it was already reported, but I had some problems with testing on iOS. Reports on the main screen were unresponsive when clicking so I needed to searh for the report on reports page, but for sure I didn't change anything on main page that could result in such bug |
src/ROUTES.ts
Outdated
| getUrlWithBackToParam(`${action as string}/${iouType as string}/upgrade/${transactionID}/${reportID}`, backTo), | ||
| getRoute: (action: IOUAction, iouType: IOUType, transactionID: string, reportID: string, backTo = '', isCategorizing = false, isReporting = false, shouldSubmitExpense = false) => { | ||
| const baseURL = `${action as string}/${iouType as string}/upgrade/${transactionID}/${reportID}` as const; | ||
| const params = new URLSearchParams(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is this supported on native too?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it works bc you still convert it to a string but I can change that to prevent confusion
| Navigation.navigate( | ||
| ROUTES.MONEY_REQUEST_UPGRADE.getRoute(CONST.IOU.ACTION.EDIT, iouType, transaction.transactionID, report.reportID, getReportRHPActiveRoute(), true), | ||
| ); | ||
| } else { | ||
| Navigation.navigate( | ||
| ROUTES.MONEY_REQUEST_STEP_CATEGORY.getRoute(CONST.IOU.ACTION.EDIT, iouType, transaction.transactionID, report.reportID, getReportRHPActiveRoute()), | ||
| ); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if no policy we're navigating somewhere else otherwise we're also navigating but to another location.
I don't see why returning is better than this approach
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is nothing wrong with this logic, but we generally prefer early return first to adhere our guidelines. This is a no blocker anyways.
src/ROUTES.ts
Outdated
| route: ':action/:iouType/upgrade/:transactionID/:reportID', | ||
| getRoute: (action: IOUAction, iouType: IOUType, transactionID: string, reportID: string, backTo = '') => | ||
| getUrlWithBackToParam(`${action as string}/${iouType as string}/upgrade/${transactionID}/${reportID}`, backTo), | ||
| getRoute: (action: IOUAction, iouType: IOUType, transactionID: string, reportID: string, backTo = '', isCategorizing = false, isReporting = false, shouldSubmitExpense = false) => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you please convert params to object?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I also thought of that, but in the file there's no other occurence of passing a single object as a param, so I wanted to follow the convention (although I also think it would be beneficial to pass a single object here and in the other cases)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I understand. We recently started migrating many functions to object param so it would be good if make these changes progressively regardless of old code.
src/libs/Navigation/types.ts
Outdated
| isCategorizing?: boolean; | ||
| isReporting?: boolean; | ||
| shouldSubmitExpense?: boolean; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These are too specific params. can you please add comments to these?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@parasharrajat added here as well. The changes should be already pushed
| policyName: string; | ||
| onConfirmUpgrade: () => void; | ||
| isCategorizing?: boolean; | ||
| isReporting?: boolean; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know we didn't have a comment here before but let's add for our prop as per guidelines.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
what do you mean? what is missing here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am suggesting to add a comment to the prop.
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| // TODO: remove this after all the changes are applied | ||
| // eslint-disable-next-line rulesdir/prefer-early-return |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a reason to disable this rule here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, eslint is actually complaining here (not like in the other place you suggested the early return - there it doesn't complain 😅 )
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah, If possible, let's use early return.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
but there will be some other changes added here
|
@parasharrajat comments addressed |
|
I will test this after 2 hours. Going away for some time. |
trjExpensify
left a comment
trjExpensify
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Core PR from a design doc for a #whatsnext project 👍
|
I will continue review once we are done with first one. |
yep, let's leave this for the follow-up as it's because how the page was coded earlier so it is also reproducible in other upgrade flows |
|
@parasharrajat may I ask you for another round? |
|
Checking this PR now. |
|
I am facing |
|
Note: After deleting the only workspace from account the category remains selected where clicking it shows upgrade workspace path. I am not considering it as a bug but we need to decide on what should be done for this. https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C09CD19HXFA/p1758044859911649 |
parasharrajat
left a comment
parasharrajat
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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 Issuessection 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
Testssection - I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the
QA stepssection - 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 verified the steps for local testing are in the
- 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.
toggleReportand notonIconClick). - 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 approved by marketing by adding the
Waiting for Copylabel 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
- 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.
- 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 usingAvatarhave 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
thisproperly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. foronClick={this.submit}the methodthis.submitshould be bound tothisin the constructor) - Any internal methods bound to
thisare necessary to be bound (i.e. avoidthis.submit = this.submit.bind(this);ifthis.submitis never passed to a component event handler likeonClick) - 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
Avataris modified, I verified thatAvataris 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
Designlabel so the design team can review the changes.
- If a new page is added, I verified it's using the
ScrollViewcomponent to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page. - If the
mainbranch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to theTeststeps. - I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.
🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed
Screenshots🔲 iOS / native16.09.2025_23.58.44_REC.mp4🔲 iOS / Safari18.09.2025_23.01.04_REC.mp4🔲 MacOS / Desktop18.09.2025_23.04.43_REC.mp4🔲 MacOS / Chrome16.09.2025_22.39.45_REC.mp4🔲 Android / Chrome16.09.2025_23.31.33_REC.mp4🔲 Android / native16.09.2025_23.13.28_REC.mp4 |
|
@cristipaval looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the |
|
That was completely unrelated to the PR |
|
✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release. |
|
🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/cristipaval in version: 9.2.16-0 🚀
|
|
🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.2.16-14 🚀
|
6 participants
Explanation of Change
Fixed Issues
$ #68993
PROPOSAL:
Tests
PREREQUISITES: in Permissions.ts change the returned value from canUseUnreportedExpense to true
Offline tests
QA Steps
// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."
Same as tests
PR Author Checklist
### Fixed Issuessection aboveTestssectionOffline stepssectionQA stepssectiontoggleReportand notonIconClick)src/languages/*files and using the translation methodSTYLE.md) were followedAvatar, I verified the components usingAvatarare working as expected)StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))Avataris modified, I verified thatAvataris working as expected in all cases)Designlabel and/or tagged@Expensify/designso the design team can review the changes.ScrollViewcomponent to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.mainbranch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to theTeststeps.Screenshots/Videos
Android: Native
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2025-09-05.at.11.23.46.mp4
iOS: Native
Screen.Recording.2025-09-05.at.11.08.03.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-09-05.at.11.15.38.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-09-05.at.10.18.38.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2025-09-05.at.10.34.31.mp4