[CP Staging] Fix postcode validation for add payment card flow #55812

ikevin127 · 2025-01-27T21:05:02Z

Explanation of Change

♻️ We're fixing the postcode validation for the Subscription > Add payment card flow to allow users to add postcodes other than US based since they are currently restricted to US based only and can't add payment cards for their subscriptions.

More context in the proposal linked below.

Fixed Issues

$ #55493
PROPOSAL: #55493 (comment)

Tests

Precondition: Create at least 1 workspace to have the Subscription section show up in Settings.

Go to Settings > Subscription > Add payment card.
Regardless of the selected currency, verify that the following postcode formats work as follows:

90000 or 90000-1234 or 90000 1234 (US based, incl. space / hyphen) ✅
AB1 2CD or AB12 3CD or AB12CD (UK based, incl. space) ✅
4 digit format like 3000 (AU / NZ based) ✅
any other special characters (@ , : ; ' " &) should not pass postcode validation ❌
Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as Tests.

QA Steps

Same as Tests.

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.

web.mov

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

melvin-bot · 2025-01-27T21:05:09Z

@Pujan92 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]

ikevin127 · 2025-01-27T21:16:38Z

src/components/AddPaymentCard/PaymentCardForm.tsx

            errors.addressStreet = translate(label.error.addressStreet);
        }

-        if (values.addressZipCode && !ValidationUtils.isValidZipCode(values.addressZipCode)) {
-            errors.addressZipCode = translate('bankAccount.error.zipCode');
+        // If tempered with, this can block users from adding payment cards so


♻️ The comment addition was requested here.

luacmartins

LGTM

ZhenjaHorbach · 2025-01-27T22:57:26Z

Oh
Sorry
Misclick 😅

ZhenjaHorbach · 2025-01-27T22:58:16Z

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 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.ts 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.
For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this 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.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

NA

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

NA

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

ZhenjaHorbach · 2025-01-27T22:59:11Z

tests/unit/ValidationUtilsTest.ts

+        });
+    });
+
+    describe('isValidPaymentZipCode', () => {


Thanks for tests

ZhenjaHorbach · 2025-01-27T23:25:03Z

I'm wondering
Should this be a valid postcode? 🧐

luacmartins · 2025-01-27T23:26:36Z

@ZhenjaHorbach not sure, but I don't think we need to validate that.

ikevin127 · 2025-01-27T23:31:29Z

@ZhenjaHorbach I don't think that's an issue, if you check the context mentioned in my proposal, when I removed the validation months ago in the first issue we decided to remove it entirely and leave it to the user to input the postcode correctly.

The current issue which this PR fixes is the fact after some recent changes which added back the old validation method, that was only allowing US based post codes, blocking any UK / AU / NZ based postcodes which would confuse users when trying to add cards for subscription payment with postcodes other than US.

ZhenjaHorbach · 2025-01-27T23:43:36Z

@ZhenjaHorbach I don't think that's an issue, if you check the context mentioned in my proposal, when I removed the validation months ago in the first issue we decided to remove it entirely and leave it to the user to input the postcode correctly.

The current issue which this PR fixes is the fact after some recent changes which added back the old validation method, that was only allowing US based post codes, blocking any UK / AU / NZ based postcodes which would confuse users when trying to add cards for subscription payment with postcodes other than US.

Got it
Thanks for the explanation !

ZhenjaHorbach · 2025-01-27T23:43:57Z

LGTM !

…eValidation [CP Staging] Fix postcode validation for add payment card flow (cherry picked from commit 6c52815) (CP triggered by luacmartins)

OSBotify · 2025-01-28T00:29:27Z

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

github-actions · 2025-01-28T01:05:52Z

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.0.89-8 🚀

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

@Expensify/applauseleads please QA this PR and check it off on the deploy checklist if it passes.

github-actions · 2025-01-28T01:54:26Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/yuwenmemon in version: 9.0.89-8 🚀

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

Fix postcode validation for add payment card flow

9da1aba

ikevin127 requested a review from a team as a code owner January 27, 2025 21:05

melvin-bot bot requested review from Pujan92 and removed request for a team January 27, 2025 21:05

fixed eslint (named imports)

786e37e

ikevin127 commented Jan 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

ikevin127 mentioned this pull request Jan 27, 2025

[HOLD for payment 2025-02-05] [HOLD for payment 2025-02-04] [$250] Valid Australian postcodes are not accepted when adding a payment card #55493

Closed

8 tasks

luacmartins approved these changes Jan 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

luacmartins changed the title ~~Fix postcode validation for add payment card flow~~ [CP Staging] Fix postcode validation for add payment card flow Jan 27, 2025

luacmartins assigned ikevin127 Jan 27, 2025

luacmartins requested review from ZhenjaHorbach and removed request for Pujan92 January 27, 2025 22:54

ZhenjaHorbach approved these changes Jan 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from luacmartins January 27, 2025 22:55

ZhenjaHorbach approved these changes Jan 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

ZhenjaHorbach reviewed Jan 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

ZhenjaHorbach approved these changes Jan 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

luacmartins approved these changes Jan 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

luacmartins merged commit 6c52815 into Expensify:main Jan 28, 2025
18 of 23 checks passed

github-actions bot added the CP Staging marks PRs that have been CP'd to staging label Jan 28, 2025

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Jan 28, 2025

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2025-01-23 #55657

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[CP Staging] Fix postcode validation for add payment card flow #55812

[CP Staging] Fix postcode validation for add payment card flow #55812

ikevin127 commented Jan 27, 2025

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 27, 2025

ikevin127 Jan 27, 2025

luacmartins left a comment

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 27, 2025

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading

ZhenjaHorbach Jan 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading

luacmartins commented Jan 27, 2025

ikevin127 commented Jan 27, 2025

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 27, 2025

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 27, 2025

OSBotify commented Jan 28, 2025

github-actions bot commented Jan 28, 2025

github-actions bot commented Jan 28, 2025

[CP Staging] Fix postcode validation for add payment card flow #55812

[CP Staging] Fix postcode validation for add payment card flow #55812

Conversation

ikevin127 commented Jan 27, 2025

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 27, 2025

ikevin127 Jan 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

luacmartins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 27, 2025

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 27, 2025 • edited Loading

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

ZhenjaHorbach Jan 27, 2025 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 27, 2025 • edited Loading

luacmartins commented Jan 27, 2025

ikevin127 commented Jan 27, 2025

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 27, 2025

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 27, 2025

OSBotify commented Jan 28, 2025

github-actions bot commented Jan 28, 2025

github-actions bot commented Jan 28, 2025

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading

ZhenjaHorbach Jan 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading