feat: integrate retry billing with backend

[MrMuzyk]

Details

Added Retry payment button and logic that retries the payment

Fixed Issues

$ #42434
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Go directly to subscription page - https://dev.new.expensify.com:8082/settings/subscription

• have a failed payment that can be retried
• retry payment
• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Testing this might be tricky and may require some code changes in order to display both cases.

One way of testing is to have some cards added and modify util method in order to return
early object we want to check

For example: Edit src/pages/settings/Subscription/CardSection/utils.ts to return status early in getBillingStatus

    return {
        title: translate('subscription.billingBanner.policyOwnerAmountOwed.title'),
        subtitle: translate('subscription.billingBanner.policyOwnerAmountOwed.subtitle', {date: endDateFormatted}),
        isError: true,
        isRetryAvailable: true,
    };

Offline tests

QA Steps

Go directly to subscription page - https://dev.new.expensify.com:8082/settings/subscription

• have a failed payment that can be retried
• retry payment
• 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 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: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-07-02.at.12.11.08.mov

MacOS: Desktop

[melvin-bot]

@allroundexperts 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]

[mananjadhav]

Will check this in a while.

[mananjadhav]

The code changes look fine to me. I'll start testing this in an hour.

[mananjadhav]

@MrMuzyk Should the API error handling be in this PR or a follow up?

[MrMuzyk]

This seems to me like unnatural state - if you there is nothing to retry you normally wouldnt see the button. How did you achieve this state?

[mananjadhav]

Agreed this is an unlikely stage but API could fail because of any error. This one I accidentally made the purchase on my real card.

[MrMuzyk]

Well, this scenario is not handled, but then again, this particular error shouldn't happen in real scenario. In order to display the button we have to first show it to the user.

There is one thing that is worth checking. There is a check that I believe should've handled it but for some reason didn't 🤔

        case SubscriptionUtils.PAYMENT_STATUS.RETRY_BILLING_ERROR:
            return {
                title: translate('subscription.billingBanner.retryBillingError.title'),
                subtitle: translate('subscription.billingBanner.retryBillingError.subtitle'),
                isError: true,
                isRetryAvailable: false,
            };

Could you check what is the subscriptionStatus returned inside getBillingStatus util at that time? I wonder why it didnt trigger this case

[mananjadhav]

That's because the ideal billing status for me is Trial period for the account I am using. I recently got my trial also extended. I had added a real card for testing and which I used to transact to retry the payment.

[mananjadhav]

I am getting a warning when trying retry several times on slow network. I think best to wrap with with useCallback?

[MrMuzyk]

That's because the ideal billing status for me is Trial period for the account I am using. I recently got my trial also extended. I had added a real card for testing and which I used to transact to retry the payment.

Seems like super edge case :D Can you check the subscriptionStatus that was returned in this case, Im curious what it was.

[mananjadhav]

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

android-retry-payment.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

mweb-chrome-retry-button.mov

iOS: Native

ios-retry-payment.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

mweb-safari-retry-payment.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web-retry-payment.mov

MacOS: Desktop

desktop-retry-payment.mov

[mananjadhav]

That's because the ideal billing status for me is Trial period for the account I am using. I recently got my trial also extended. I had added a real card for testing and which I used to transact to retry the payment.

Seems like super edge case :D Can you check the subscriptionStatus that was returned in this case, Im curious what it was.

Yeah I said we don't need to worry about my case. But what happens if the API fails in general?

[MrMuzyk]

In theory it should fall into this case:

    case SubscriptionUtils.PAYMENT_STATUS.RETRY_BILLING_ERROR:
        return {
            title: translate('subscription.billingBanner.retryBillingError.title'),
            subtitle: translate('subscription.billingBanner.retryBillingError.subtitle'),
            isError: true,
            isRetryAvailable: false,
        };

and we should display banner on top

[MrMuzyk]

I am getting a warning when trying retry several times on slow network. I think best to wrap with with useCallback?

Im on web but I couldnt reproduce that. Button is disabled for the time of request so it shouldn't be a problem

slow-3g.mp4

[MrMuzyk]

I believe that testing this is super tricky in general on our end because we do need to temper with code and its not a natural flow. Im aware that it might need some followup fixes if some edge cases popup.

[mananjadhav]

Can you try on Android? Because for me on the Android emulator it is completely unusable. It shows a warning and loader also takes a lot of time?

[MrMuzyk]

Yeah, checking

[MrMuzyk]

Sorry it took so long, android things 😓 Had to wipe the whole thing and rebuild from scratch. Anyway, here is video without any network throttling. On poor LTE it also worked fine. Not sure how well this feature works on android but when Ive swapped network type to poor GSM it loaded for like 2 min so I didnt record retrying that :D

android-retry.mp4

[mananjadhav]

Weird I can't reproduce the issue anymore.

[blimpich]

Yeah testing this is quite tricky. I think we're good to move forward though. @mananjadhav I checked off the android portion of your reviewer checklist since @MrMuzyk showed the android version working correctly.

There will probably be follow up as we start testing this with more end-to-end flows, and that is okay 👍

[OSBotify]

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

[mananjadhav]

Thanks @blimpich. Yeah I couldn't reproduce the issue at my end, and I was able to test it successfully. I uploaded the Android video.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.0.4-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/tgolen in version: 9.0.4-5 🚀

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

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 9.0.5-13 🚀

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