Fix/37095: Tag list show required by dukenv0307 · Pull Request #37388 · Expensify/App

dukenv0307 · 2024-02-28T02:20:01Z

Details

Disabled tags are showing as required for "Multi level tags"

Fixed Issues

$ #37095
PROPOSAL: #37095 (comment)

Tests

In OD as admin enable "People must tag expenses" for some workspace
Enable "Use multiple levels of tags"
Create/import some multi-level tags and mark at least one as not required (See the below image)
Invite user B to the policy as employee
As employee go to the workspace chat invited to
Request money and enter the amount and click next
Observe that only required tag in OD appears as required in ND ( There is a "required" text next to the tag list name)

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

In OD as admin enable "People must tag expenses" for some workspace
Enable "Use multiple levels of tags"
Create/import some multi-level tags and mark at least one as not required (See the below image)
Invite user B to the policy as employee
As employee go to the workspace chat invited to
Request money and enter the amount and click next
Observe that only required tag in OD appears as required in ND ( There is a "required" text next to the tag list name)

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screencast.from.04-03-2024.01.10.37.webm

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screencast.from.28-02-2024.09.13.37.webm

iOS: Native

Screencast.from.04-03-2024.01.04.14.webm

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screencast.from.28-02-2024.09.13.04.webm

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screencast.from.28-02-2024.09.12.27.webm

MacOS: Desktop

Screencast.from.04-03-2024.00.50.14.webm

melvin-bot · 2024-02-28T02:20:06Z

@akinwale 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]

dukenv0307 · 2024-02-28T02:44:26Z

    const policyTagLists = useMemo(() => PolicyUtils.getTagLists(policyTags), [policyTags]);

+    // Check if it is the multiple levels tags or not
+    const isMultipleLevelsTags = policyTagLists && policyTagLists.length > 1;


I think we need to return required field in case of single tag. Because with the current solution, in case of multiple tags but just have one tag list, isMultipleLevelsTags is false

Same as this one #35134 (comment)

dukenv0307 · 2024-02-29T22:17:03Z

@akinwale Ping to review in case you miss it

akinwale · 2024-03-01T08:39:10Z

@akinwale Ping to review in case you miss it

Thanks for the bump. I will review today.

akinwale · 2024-03-02T07:29:00Z

@dukenv0307 Please upload test videos or screenshots for Android native, iOS native and Desktop.

akinwale · 2024-03-02T08:03:49Z

@dukenv0307

You also need to clarify your test steps because there are two things that can be disabled when dealing with tag lists: the Required flag for a tag list, or each individual tag when a user clicks on edit tags for a particular tag list.

Create/import some multi-level tags and mark at least one as disabled

What should be marked as disabled? The Required switch or an individual tag when the user clicks on Edit tags?

Disabled tags shouldn't appear

What should not appear here? The "Required" text next to the tag name, or each individual disabled tag that corresponds to a tag list?

akinwale · 2024-03-02T08:20:47Z

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

37388-android-native.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

37388-android-chrome.mp4

iOS: Native

37388-ios-native.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

37388-ios-safari.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

37388-web.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

37388-desktop.mp4

akinwale

Just a couple of things to address: #37388 (comment) and #37388 (comment).

dukenv0307 · 2024-03-03T18:20:36Z

                    disabled={didConfirm}
                    interactive={!isReadOnly}
-                    rightLabel={isTagRequired ? translate('common.required') : ''}
+                    rightLabel={required ? translate('common.required') : ''}


We use required field in both single tag and mulitple levels tags case based on comment

dukenv0307 · 2024-03-03T18:46:45Z

@akinwale

I updated videos.
I resolved comment.
I updated to use required field in both single tag and multiple levels tag.
I updated isSupplementary: !isTagRequired based on comment

akinwale

LGTM.

MonilBhavsar · 2024-03-04T09:06:52Z

-            isSupplementary: !isTagRequired,
-        })),
+        ..._.map(policyTagLists, ({name, required}, index) => {
+            const isTagRequired = !isUndefined(required) && required;


Why we removed canUseViolations?
And this does not work for single level tags where required is not set for each tag, right?

And this does not work for single level tags where required is not set for each tag, right?

In single-level tag, it still works because we also have required field. But we have the issue with BE side so that field is not returned correctly (Known issue mentioned here). Below is the data returned from BE side in case of single-level tag:

Why we removed canUseViolations

I updated the PR to add the canUseViolations

This is held on backend change as per https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1708948376264389?thread_ts=1708732718.173419&cid=C01GTK53T8Q?

Is it still on HOLD? What PR?

@MonilBhavsar @akinwale BE is fixed (See comment). I just tested it again and it works well

dukenv0307 · 2024-04-05T10:43:59Z

@MonilBhavsar Con you help review PR again?

MonilBhavsar · 2024-04-05T10:56:50Z

Sorry looking
Just want to confirm if we followed this checklist item and retested. @dukenv0307 @akinwale

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.

akinwale · 2024-04-05T11:03:12Z

Sorry looking Just want to confirm if we followed this checklist item and retested. @dukenv0307 @akinwale

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.

@MonilBhavsar Yes, I did retest on all platforms.

MonilBhavsar

Thanks for confirming!

OSBotify · 2024-04-05T15:07:06Z

✋ 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 · 2024-04-08T11:07:53Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/MonilBhavsar in version: 1.4.61-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2024-04-08T13:04:31Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/MonilBhavsar in version: 1.4.61-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2024-04-10T17:22:08Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 1.4.61-8 🚀

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

fix tag list show required

3c62ad7

dukenv0307 requested a review from a team as a code owner February 28, 2024 02:20

melvin-bot Bot requested review from akinwale and removed request for a team February 28, 2024 02:20

dukenv0307 added 2 commits February 28, 2024 09:28

fix remove redundant code

bce6391

fix remove redundant logic

cd91a49

dukenv0307 commented Feb 28, 2024

View reviewed changes

akinwale suggested changes Mar 2, 2024

View reviewed changes

dukenv0307 added 2 commits March 4, 2024 00:56

fix merge main

fc5bebc

fix single tag case

8cd38b8

dukenv0307 commented Mar 3, 2024

View reviewed changes

fix lint

cde6014

dukenv0307 added 2 commits March 4, 2024 01:59

fix create isTagRequired variable

247827b

fix remove isTag

7d3a9c6

akinwale approved these changes Mar 4, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from MonilBhavsar March 4, 2024 08:40

MonilBhavsar reviewed Mar 4, 2024

View reviewed changes

dukenv0307 and others added 3 commits March 5, 2024 09:24

fix add canUseViolation

f0c955b

Merge branch 'main' into fix/37095-disabled-tags-are-showing-as-required

5ef00a4

fix lint

d3b88b5

Christinadobrzyn mentioned this pull request Mar 13, 2024

[$500] Disabled tags are showing as required for "Multi level tags" #37095

Closed

6 tasks

dukenv0307 added 2 commits April 1, 2024 10:20

fix merge main

7b00537

fix conflict

025be6b

akinwale approved these changes Apr 1, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from MonilBhavsar April 1, 2024 06:10

MonilBhavsar approved these changes Apr 5, 2024

View reviewed changes

MonilBhavsar merged commit 4b59e6a into Expensify:main Apr 5, 2024

github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Apr 8, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-04-08 #39807

Closed

izarutskaya mentioned this pull request Apr 9, 2024

[Simplified Collect: Tags] Tags - "Required" text is missing for required tags #39916

Closed

6 tasks

This was referenced Apr 12, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-04-08 #39807 Derevyaa/Expensify-App#1

Closed

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-04-09 #39808 Derevyaa/Expensify-App#2

Closed

Conversation

dukenv0307 commented Feb 28, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Feb 28, 2024

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Feb 29, 2024

Uh oh!

akinwale commented Mar 1, 2024

Uh oh!

akinwale commented Mar 2, 2024

Uh oh!

akinwale commented Mar 2, 2024

Uh oh!

akinwale commented Mar 2, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

akinwale left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Mar 3, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

akinwale left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 Mar 5, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Apr 5, 2024

Uh oh!

MonilBhavsar commented Apr 5, 2024

Uh oh!

akinwale commented Apr 5, 2024

Uh oh!

MonilBhavsar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Apr 5, 2024

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Apr 8, 2024

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Apr 8, 2024

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Apr 10, 2024

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

dukenv0307 commented Feb 28, 2024 •

edited

Loading

dukenv0307 commented Mar 3, 2024 •

edited

Loading

dukenv0307 Mar 5, 2024 •

edited

Loading