Skip to content

Automatically create a GH when users try to enable travel on non-verified domains#63208

Merged
youssef-lr merged 15 commits intomainfrom
stites-requestTravelEnablement2
Jul 2, 2025
Merged

Automatically create a GH when users try to enable travel on non-verified domains#63208
youssef-lr merged 15 commits intomainfrom
stites-requestTravelEnablement2

Conversation

@stitesExpensify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@stitesExpensify stitesExpensify commented May 30, 2025

Explanation of Change

We need to start calling our API to create a Gh issue when users click the travel button

Fixed Issues

$ #63567
PROPOSAL: n/a

Tests

  1. Create a new account
  2. Go to the travel page
  3. Click the enable travel button
  4. Run ./script/bwm.sh
  5. Ensure that a GH issue is created
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

n/a

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

  1. Create a new account
  2. Go to the travel page
  3. Click the enable travel button
  4. Ensure that a GH issue is created
  • 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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
  • 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.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
MacOS: Desktop

@stitesExpensify stitesExpensify self-assigned this May 30, 2025
@stitesExpensify stitesExpensify changed the title Automatically create a GH when users try to enable travel on non-verified domains [HOLD https://github.com/Expensify/Web-Expensify/pull/46996] Automatically create a GH when users try to enable travel on non-verified domains Jun 3, 2025
@stitesExpensify stitesExpensify marked this pull request as ready for review June 3, 2025 22:47
@stitesExpensify stitesExpensify requested a review from a team as a code owner June 3, 2025 22:47
@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested a review from akinwale June 3, 2025 22:47
@melvin-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 3, 2025

@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]

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot removed the request for review from a team June 3, 2025 22:47
@akinwale
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

akinwale commented Jun 4, 2025

@stitesExpensify Does this require C+ review?

@stitesExpensify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

I think that we might as well, just to be safe

@stitesExpensify stitesExpensify requested a review from rojiphil June 5, 2025 14:28
@stitesExpensify stitesExpensify changed the title [HOLD https://github.com/Expensify/Web-Expensify/pull/46996] Automatically create a GH when users try to enable travel on non-verified domains [HOLD https://github.com/Expensify/Web-Expensify/pull/47228] Automatically create a GH when users try to enable travel on non-verified domains Jun 13, 2025
@stitesExpensify stitesExpensify changed the title [HOLD https://github.com/Expensify/Web-Expensify/pull/47228] Automatically create a GH when users try to enable travel on non-verified domains Automatically create a GH when users try to enable travel on non-verified domains Jun 26, 2025
@stitesExpensify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@akinwale @rojiphil can I get a review here please? :)

@rojiphil
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Reviewing today

@akinwale
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@stitesExpensify To clarify, do you need both of us to review or just one reviewer?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@rojiphil rojiphil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@stitesExpensify The code changes LGTM but I have just one comment. Please have a look.
Also, how do we verify the creation of GH issue?

Comment thread src/components/BookTravelButton.tsx Outdated
navigateToAcceptTerms(CONST.TRAVEL.DEFAULT_DOMAIN);
} else if (!isBetaEnabled(CONST.BETAS.IS_TRAVEL_VERIFIED)) {
setVerificationModalVisibility(true);
requestTravelAccess();
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we may want to prevent calling TRAVEL_SIGNUP_REQUEST API again once we have successfully requested travel access. We can do this by checking the existence of lastTravelSignupRequestTime. This can help us avoid unnecessary requests to the backend and, also, potential duplicate GH issue creation. What do you think?

Image

@rojiphil
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

To clarify, do you need both of us to review or just one reviewer?

@akinwale I think one may be enough but @stitesExpensify can confirm. It looks like the auto-assignment bot failed to assign the PR to me from the assigned issue.

@stitesExpensify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

One is enough! Thanks for your review, I'll get that updated

@rojiphil
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

rojiphil commented Jul 1, 2025

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 that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
  • I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • Android: HybridApp
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: HybridApp
    • 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 there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
  • 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: HybridApp
63208-android-hybrid-001.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
63208-mweb-chrome-001.mp4
iOS: HybridApp
63208-ios-hybrid-001.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
63208-mweb-safari-001.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
63208-web-chrome-001.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
63208-desktop-001.mp4

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@rojiphil rojiphil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@stitesExpensify Thanks for the update. The changes work well in online scenarios but we will run into problems in offline scenarios. Currently, when offline, all such requests will be queued, and sent once the app comes back online thereby resulting in duplicate requests. The attached video demonstrates this. One way to prevent this is by optimistically setting lastTravelSignupRequestTime. What do you think?

63208-offline-query-001.mp4

@stitesExpensify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Hey @rojiphil just pushed up optimistically setting the data!

@rojiphil
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

rojiphil commented Jul 1, 2025

just pushed up optimistically setting the data!

@stitesExpensify Thanks. That looks great. One more change we need is to add dependency for travelSettings?.lastTravelSignupRequestTime here to trigger the usage of updated travelSettings.

@stitesExpensify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Ah yes, of course. Thank you very much. Updated!

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@rojiphil rojiphil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @stitesExpensify. LGTM and works great as well.
Just that there are merge conflicts to be resolved. Otherwise, we are good to go.

63208-offline-web-chrome-001.mp4

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested a review from youssef-lr July 2, 2025 02:52
@melvin-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 2, 2025

@youssef-lr 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]

@youssef-lr youssef-lr merged commit fedc2e8 into main Jul 2, 2025
22 checks passed
@youssef-lr youssef-lr deleted the stites-requestTravelEnablement2 branch July 2, 2025 21:10
@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OSBotify commented Jul 2, 2025

✋ 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
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Jul 3, 2025

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/youssef-lr in version: 9.1.75-0 🚀

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

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Jul 7, 2025

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.1.76-5 🚀

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

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants