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.

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

[Debug Mode] Add transaction and violation data to debug mode #50745

Open
wants to merge 66 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

pac-guerreiro
Copy link
Contributor

@pac-guerreiro pac-guerreiro commented Oct 14, 2024

Details

Fixed Issues

$#50335
PROPOSAL:

  • Add transaction debug page, with details, json and violations tabs
  • Add transaction violation page
  • Add button to redirect user from report debug page to transaction report page
  • Add button to redirect user from report action debug page to transaction report page

Tests

  1. Enable debug mode in Troubleshoot
  2. Open an expense thread (create one if you don't have any)
  3. Enter debug view then check if there's a button named View transaction in details tab
  4. Click the button and check the details, json and violations tabs
  5. Confirm that any field you modify in details tab is saved correctly
  6. On violations tab, try creating and modifying a violation and check that the UI shows your changes in real time

Offline tests

Same as tests

QA Steps

Same as tests

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 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
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed 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.js 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.
  • 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.-.Chrome.mp4
iOS: Native
iOS.-.Native.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
iOS.-.Safari.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
MacOS.-.Chrome.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
MacOS.-.Native.mp4

@pac-guerreiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

pac-guerreiro commented Oct 14, 2024

Todo:

  • Create DebugUtils.validateTransactionDraftProperty plus unit tests
  • Finish transaction violations tab
  • Create button in debug report page to redirect to debug transaction page
  • Add screen recordings
  • Add QA testing steps

@pac-guerreiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

pac-guerreiro commented Oct 15, 2024

I didn't have much time as I wanted to work on this today but here goes my update!

Today's update:

  • Create DebugUtils.validateTransactionDraftProperty

Todo:

  • Add remaining property validations to DebugUtils.validateTransactionDraftProperty
  • Add unit tests for DebugUtils.validateTransactionDraftProperty
  • Do some manual tests by modifying transaction data and saving it
  • Finish transaction violations tab
  • Create button in debug report page to redirect to debug transaction page
  • Add screen recordings
  • Add QA testing steps

@pac-guerreiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

Today's update:

  • Add remaining property validations to DebugUtils.validateTransactionDraftProperty
  • Add unit tests for DebugUtils.validateTransactionDraftProperty
  • Do some manual tests by modifying transaction data and saving it

Todo:

  • Create TRANSACTION_FORM_INPUT_IDS
  • Finish transaction violations tab
  • Create button in debug report page to redirect to debug transaction page
  • Add screen recordings
  • Add QA testing steps

@pac-guerreiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

Today's update:

  • Create TRANSACTION_FORM_INPUT_IDS
  • Create button in debug report page to redirect to debug transaction page
  • Create button in debug report action page to redirect to debug transaction page
  • Create button in debug transaction to redirect to report

Todo:

  • Finish transaction violations tab
  • Add screen recordings
  • Add QA testing steps

@pac-guerreiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

Today's update:

  • Add transaction violation creation page

Todo:

  • Fix issue where newly created transaction violation replaces all existing transaction violations
  • Add transaction violation page to allow users to modify data, view JSON data representation and delete data
  • Finish transaction violations tab
  • Add screen recordings
  • Add QA testing steps

@pac-guerreiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

pac-guerreiro commented Oct 21, 2024

Today's update:

  • Fix issue where newly created transaction violation replaces all existing transaction violations
  • Add transaction violation page to allow users to modify data, view JSON data representation and delete data
  • Finish transaction violations tab

Todo:

  • Fix stale transaction violation data after updating a violation until the app is refreshed
  • Refactor debug details constant field options. There are field name collisions between data types
  • Add screen recordings
  • Add QA testing steps

@pac-guerreiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

pac-guerreiro commented Oct 23, 2024

Today's update:

  • Fix stale transaction violation data after updating a violation until the app is refreshed
  • Refactor debug details constant field options. There are field name collisions between data types

Todo:

  • Add missing field names in debug details constant field options
  • Add screen recordings
  • Add QA testing steps

@pac-guerreiro pac-guerreiro changed the title [WIP][Debug Mode] Add transaction and violation data to debug mode [Debug Mode] Add transaction and violation data to debug mode Oct 23, 2024
@pac-guerreiro pac-guerreiro marked this pull request as ready for review October 23, 2024 15:32
@pac-guerreiro pac-guerreiro requested a review from a team as a code owner October 23, 2024 15:32
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from DylanDylann and removed request for a team October 23, 2024 15:32
@pac-guerreiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yesterday I resolved all the typescript issues present in the PR

@DylanDylann
Copy link
Contributor

@pac-guerreiro Many thanks. I will try to review again on this weekend

@DylanDylann
Copy link
Contributor

DylanDylann commented Nov 11, 2024

@pac-guerreiro On the tag picker, let's remove the save button. I think we should update the value and navigate go back right after the user click on the new value. Like we did on category page

Screen.Recording.2024-11-11.at.14.19.02.mov

@DylanDylann
Copy link
Contributor

DylanDylann commented Nov 11, 2024

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
Screen.Recording.2024-11-11.at.14.55.32.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2024-11-11.at.14.44.08.mov
iOS: Native
Screen.Recording.2024-11-11.at.15.10.06.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-11-11.at.14.42.07.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-11-11.at.14.33.13.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2024-11-11.at.14.39.51.mov

@DylanDylann
Copy link
Contributor

@pac-guerreiro One left comment: #50745 (comment)

src/libs/DebugUtils.ts Show resolved Hide resolved
src/libs/DebugUtils.ts Show resolved Hide resolved
src/libs/DebugUtils.ts Show resolved Hide resolved
@pac-guerreiro pac-guerreiro force-pushed the pac-guerreiro/feature/50335-add-transaction-and-violation-data-to-debug-mode branch from 3e8499a to ff0aa9b Compare November 12, 2024 10:34
@pac-guerreiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

@DylanDylann @fabioh8010 Thanks for your feedback!

I addressed all your suggestions, let me know if there's anything else that needs fixing/refactoring 😄

Copy link
Contributor

@DylanDylann DylanDylann left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Look good to me 💯

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from puneetlath November 13, 2024 07:34
…and-violation-data-to-debug-mode

# Conflicts:
#	src/components/TagPicker/index.tsx
#	src/libs/DebugUtils.ts
#	src/pages/Debug/Report/DebugReportPage.tsx
#	src/types/onyx/Report.ts
@pac-guerreiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

@DylanDylann thanks! 🙏 I just resolved the conflicts 😄

@@ -31,11 +31,13 @@ type TagPickerProps = {
/** Should show the selected option that is disabled? */
shouldShowDisabledAndSelectedOption?: boolean;

shouldOrderListByTagName?: boolean;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please add prop description

Comment on lines 15 to 19
type DebugTagPickerProps = {
policyID: string;
tagName?: string;
onSubmit: (item: ListItem) => void;
};
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please add descriptions for each prop

Comment on lines 16 to 18
type DebugTransactionViolationsProps = {
transactionID: string;
};
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please add descriptions for each prop

Comment on lines 10 to 15
type ConstantPickerProps = {
formType: string;
fieldName: string;
fieldValue?: string;
onSubmit: (item: ListItem) => void;
};
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please add descriptions for each prop

@puneetlath
Copy link
Contributor

Looks like there are lint failures. Also, this PR is huge. I would love to see in the future, that if we find the PR is growing large like this, to separate it into multiple smaller PRs. One GH issue does not have to mean one PR. It's always a good think to break a big problem into smaller chunks. For example, I think this PR could have been broken down into smaller chunks by:

  • one PR for showing transaction debug page with transaction details
  • one PR for showing violation debug page with violation details
  • one PR for the ability to select different violations
  • one PR for the ability to create new violations

@@ -37,11 +37,14 @@ type PendingChatMember = {

/** Report participant properties */
type Participant = OnyxCommon.OnyxValueWithOfflineFeedback<{
/** Whether the participant is hidden */
hidden?: boolean;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why are we adding all this to the report type? We recently worked in this issue to clean up the Report type to only store data that is sent by the server. #51867

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I added this because it's being returned from the server 😅

Screenshot 2024-11-14 at 18 16 19

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah gotcha. Yeah "hidden" is being removed from the server as we speak. What about the other ones. Do we need those?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@pac-guerreiro pac-guerreiro Nov 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I just removed all the unused properties as agreed in #51867 😄

Thanks for the feedback @puneetlath 😄

@pac-guerreiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

@puneetlath @fabioh8010

All feedback addressed and conflicts resolved! Thanks for your feedback 😄

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