Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Prevent approving in expense report only has pending card/scan failure transactions #55345

Open
wants to merge 19 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Prevent approving in expense report only has pending card/scan failure transactions #55345

wants to merge 19 commits into from
+211 −13

Conversation

nkdengineer
Copy link
Contributor

Explanation of Change

Prevent approving in expense report only has pending card/scan failure transactions

Fixed Issues

$ #54996
PROPOSAL: #54996 (comment)

Tests

Precondition: Enable workflow

  1. Open the submitted expense report that only has pending card/scan failure transactions
  2. Verify that no approve button appears
  3. Open Reports > Outstanding and notice the row of the expense report
  4. Verify that View button appear in large screen
  5. Click on this report row
  6. Verify that no approve button in the header of the report in RHP
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

None

QA Steps

Precondition: Enable workflow

  1. Open the submitted expense report that only has pending card/scan failure transactions
  2. Verify that no approve button appears
  3. Open Reports > Outstanding and notice the row of the expense report
  4. Verify that View button appear in large screen
  5. Click on this report row
  6. Verify that no approve button in the header of the report in RHP
  • 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 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
Screen.Recording.2025-01-16.at.14.50.41.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2025-01-16.at.14.40.11.mov
iOS: Native
Screen.Recording.2025-01-16.at.15.52.42.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-01-16.at.14.43.59.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-01-16.at.14.39.14.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2025-01-16.at.14.47.16.mov

@nkdengineer nkdengineer marked this pull request as ready for review January 16, 2025 09:54
@nkdengineer nkdengineer requested a review from a team as a code owner January 16, 2025 09:54
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from shubham1206agra and removed request for a team January 16, 2025 09:54
@melvin-bot Melvin Bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 16, 2025

@shubham1206agra 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]

@luacmartins luacmartins self-requested a review January 16, 2025 15:14
luacmartins
luacmartins previously approved these changes Jan 17, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@luacmartins luacmartins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

luacmartins
luacmartins reviewed Jan 21, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@luacmartins luacmartins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@nkdengineer let's address the conflicts and comments

@luacmartins luacmartins mentioned this pull request Jan 21, 2025
Closed
@luacmartins luacmartins self-requested a review January 23, 2025 20:05
luacmartins
luacmartins reviewed Jan 23, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@luacmartins luacmartins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@nkdengineer we have conflicts, let's address those!

@nkdengineer
Copy link
Contributor Author

@nkdengineer we have conflicts, let's address those!

Updated.

@shubham1206agra
Copy link
Contributor

@nkdengineer Can you address these comments?

@luacmartins luacmartins self-requested a review January 27, 2025 17:42
luacmartins
luacmartins reviewed Jan 27, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@luacmartins luacmartins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@nkdengineer let's address the pending comments! We're so close!

@nkdengineer
Copy link
Contributor Author

Will give an update soon.

@luacmartins
Copy link
Contributor

luacmartins commented Jan 28, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Thanks! Looking forward to the update!

@shubham1206agra
Copy link
Contributor

@nkdengineer Bump here

@shubham1206agra
Copy link
Contributor

@nkdengineer Fix lint please

@nkdengineer
Copy link
Contributor Author

Done.

@luacmartins
Copy link
Contributor

@nkdengineer we have a failing jest test. It seems unrelated, but maybe merging main might fix it.

luacmartins
luacmartins previously approved these changes Feb 3, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@luacmartins luacmartins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@luacmartins
Copy link
Contributor

@shubham1206agra all yours

@nkdengineer @shubham1206agra
Update src/libs/actions/IOU.ts
23f0670 
Co-authored-by: Shubham Agrawal <[email protected]>
@luacmartins
Copy link
Contributor

luacmartins commented Feb 6, 2025 •
edited
Loading

@nkdengineer Jest unit tests is failing now

@nkdengineer
Copy link
Contributor Author

@luacmartins It's fixed cc @shubham1206agra

luacmartins
luacmartins requested changes Feb 6, 2025
View reviewed changes
src/libs/actions/IOU.ts
const hasOnlyPendingCardOrScanningTransactions =
reportTransactions.length > 0 &&
reportTransactions.every(
(t) =>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we rename this variable to something more meaningful?

Suggested change
(t) =>
(transaction) =>

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

@shubham1206agra shubham1206agra shubham1206agra left review comments

@luacmartins luacmartins luacmartins requested changes

Requested changes must be addressed to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@nkdengineer @shubham1206agra @luacmartins