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

Remove unnecessary calls to OpenPrivatePersonalDetailsPage #37047

Merged
merged 25 commits into from
Apr 9, 2024

Conversation

grgia
Copy link
Contributor

@grgia grgia commented Feb 21, 2024

Details

We now return these details in OpenApp, so I'm removing extra calls to fetch this data.

Fixed Issues

$ #23873
$ #36647

Tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console
  • Same as QA

Offline tests

QA Steps

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console
  • In the profile page, under private personal details, set Legal Name, DOB, Address for a test account.
  • Log out and Log back in
  • Open the following pages:
  • Profile page
  • Card Details Page (if account has an expensify card)
  • Verify details are displayed ✅
image image

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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label 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
  • 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 form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label 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: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
MacOS: Desktop

@grgia grgia self-assigned this Feb 21, 2024
@grgia grgia requested a review from a team as a code owner February 21, 2024 20:08
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from s77rt and removed request for a team February 21, 2024 20:08
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 21, 2024

@s77rt 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]

Comment on lines -11 to -18
useEffect(() => {
const personalDetails = PersonalDetails.getPrivatePersonalDetails();
// eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/prefer-nullish-coalescing
if (network?.isOffline || (Boolean(personalDetails) && personalDetails?.isLoading !== undefined)) {
return;
}

PersonalDetails.openPersonalDetails();
Copy link
Contributor

@s77rt s77rt Feb 21, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

NAB. Remove leftovers PersonalDetails.getPrivatePersonalDetails and PersonalDetails.openPersonalDetails.

))}
</>
)}
<>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

NAB. Remove react fragment

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented Feb 21, 2024

Deep linking into forms that relay on private personal details do not work correctly since default values are taken into consideration only on the first render

Screen.Recording.2024-02-21.at.10.06.33.PM.mov

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented Feb 21, 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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label 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
  • 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 form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label 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 android
Android: mWeb Chrome mweb-chrome
iOS: Native ios
iOS: mWeb Safari mweb-safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web.mov
MacOS: Desktop desktop

@grgia grgia requested a review from s77rt February 22, 2024 00:45
@grgia
Copy link
Contributor Author

grgia commented Feb 22, 2024

@s77rt I fixed the deep linking bug

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@s77rt Im wondering about leaving this hook/function instead of deleting it for later if we need to load confidential data for some reason. What do you think? Or should we just add this back when we later need it

Copy link
Contributor

@s77rt s77rt Feb 22, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should just add it back when needed. It's always best to avoid unnecessary code hanging in the code base. FWIW I don't think we would ever need this hook again since we will always have the private data on OpenApp

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Although, I realize that currently logged in users wont have the data unless they log out and back in / reconnect

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh right! This is a breaking change for logged users. But it's a temporarily issue. Can we maybe send pusher events to all users to get their private data?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@grgia Was there any discussion regarding this issue? or whether it's a blocker?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm not sure if it makes sense to keep the call for one page only, it may be better to do nothing and close the PR. However I'm inclined to remove the redundancy. I just realized something, how can a user upgrade the app and not call OpenApp?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah that's a good point. @marcaaron mind if I ask for your expertise here?

Essentially, we've added the privatePersonalDetails to openApp, so there's no need to send them on these pages. However, we're concerned that this is a breaking change for users until openApp is called when they log in / out. Is this something I need to worry about?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@grgia can you help me understand the consequences of showing the stale data to the affected users?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@marcaaron we didn't use to store these private personal details in ONYX, now we do via Open App. So any users who havent logged in yet or called OpenApp in awhile wouldnt have the data in ONYX to access.

So the question is, do we keep a call to the API here?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm I don't feel too passionate. It feels like we can remove it? Unless something major will break I would treat it as a minor bug affecting older app versions. We are going to force upgrade users to use a new version of the app eventually which should trigger an OpenApp call (at least in the case of native apps).

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented Feb 22, 2024

Tests well. @grgia Can you please complete the checklist?

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented Feb 22, 2024

For the failing test, can you try merge main

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented Feb 22, 2024

Failing ts test is effecting all current open PRs (can be ignored)

@grgia
Copy link
Contributor Author

grgia commented Feb 28, 2024

Thanks @s77rt for your patience while I was OOO! I'll work on updating this PR

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

@grgia grgia requested a review from s77rt March 12, 2024 11:13
@grgia
Copy link
Contributor Author

grgia commented Mar 12, 2024

@s77rt apologies for the delay on updating this, I've created an ADHOC build for testing

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented Mar 29, 2024

@grgia Can you check the 2 above comments, they don't seem resolved

@grgia grgia requested review from s77rt and marcaaron April 5, 2024 08:15
@grgia
Copy link
Contributor Author

grgia commented Apr 5, 2024

Addressed comments @s77rt

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from amyevans April 5, 2024 13:09
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Apr 5, 2024

@amyevans 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]

Copy link
Contributor

@amyevans amyevans left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good!

@marcaaron would you like to review?

@marcaaron
Copy link
Contributor

No need to block on me!

@grgia grgia merged commit 8a64b29 into main Apr 9, 2024
16 checks passed
@grgia grgia deleted the georgia-private-personal-details branch April 9, 2024 11:55
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Apr 9, 2024

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/grgia in version: 1.4.62-0 🚀

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

1 similar comment
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/grgia in version: 1.4.62-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/grgia in version: 1.4.62-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.4.62-17 🚀

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants