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

feat: Step 4 UI #52384

Open
wants to merge 15 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

feat: Step 4 UI #52384

wants to merge 15 commits into from
+1,241 −35

Conversation

MrMuzyk
Copy link
Contributor

@MrMuzyk MrMuzyk commented Nov 12, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Explanation of Change

Added UI for step 4 of global reimbursements - Beneficial Owners

Fixed Issues

$ #50900
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  • Have debug mode enabled
  • Go to workspace with currency set to CAD, EUR, GBP or AUD
  • Connect Bank Account
  • Go to step 4
  • UI gathering all required data for this step should be visible
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

  • Have debug mode enabled
  • Go to workspace with currency set to CAD, EUR, GBP or AUD
  • Connect Bank Account
  • Go to step 4
  • UI gathering all required data for this step should be visible
  • 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 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
step-4-android-native.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
step-4-android-chrome.mp4
iOS: Native
step-4-ios-native.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
step-4-ios-safari.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
step-4-web.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
step-4-desktop.mp4

MrMuzyk
MrMuzyk commented Nov 12, 2024
View reviewed changes
src/languages/es.ts
@@ -2246,6 +2248,43 @@ const translations = {
byAddingThisBankAccount: 'Al añadir esta cuenta bancaria, confirmas que has leído, comprendido y aceptado',
owners: 'Dueños',
},
ownershipInfoStep: {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1731423389064609
Getting a confirmation for the translation

@MrMuzyk MrMuzyk marked this pull request as ready for review November 12, 2024 14:58
@MrMuzyk MrMuzyk requested a review from a team as a code owner November 12, 2024 14:58
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from ikevin127 November 12, 2024 14:58
@melvin-bot Melvin Bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 12, 2024

@ikevin127 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 November 12, 2024 14:58
@madmax330 madmax330 requested review from madmax330 and hungvu193 and removed request for ikevin127 November 12, 2024 16:44
@madmax330 madmax330 assigned madmax330 and unassigned madmax330 Nov 12, 2024
@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

I'll take a look today 👀

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

hungvu193 commented Nov 14, 2024 •
edited
Loading

It looks like this PR is based on #51648. Let's wait for #51648 to be merged then.

@MrMuzyk
Copy link
Contributor Author

MrMuzyk commented Nov 14, 2024

It looks like this PR is based on #51648. Let's wait for #51648 to be merged then.

It isn't. These might seem similar but only files we're both changing are translations and types. They use same mechanism at the core of the main file but steps are completely different

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

Can you merge main please?

@MrMuzyk
Copy link
Contributor Author

MrMuzyk commented Nov 15, 2024

@hungvu193 Rebased. Good to review

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

@madmax330 madmax330 Awaiting requested review from madmax330

@hungvu193 hungvu193 Awaiting requested review from hungvu193

At least 1 approving review is required 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
@MrMuzyk @hungvu193 @madmax330