fix: fix inconsistency in the popular tab

[salimtb]

Description

fix inconsistency in the Popular tab , it should be displayed im Lower case

Related issues

Fixes: #8250

Manual testing steps

1. Go to add Network
2. You can see the popular tab in UpperCase

Screenshots/Recordings

Before

After

Pre-merge author checklist

• I’ve followed MetaMask Coding Standards.
• I've clearly explained what problem this PR is solving and how it is solved.
• I've linked related issues
• I've included manual testing steps
• I've included screenshots/recordings if applicable
• I’ve included tests if applicable
• I’ve documented my code using JSDoc format if applicable
• I’ve applied the right labels on the PR (see labeling guidelines). Not required for external contributors.
• I’ve properly set the pull request status:
  • In case it's not yet "ready for review", I've set it to "draft".
  • In case it's "ready for review", I've changed it from "draft" to "non-draft".

Pre-merge reviewer checklist

• I've manually tested the PR (e.g. pull and build branch, run the app, test code being changed).
• I confirm that this PR addresses all acceptance criteria described in the ticket it closes and includes the necessary testing evidence such as recordings and or screenshots.

[github-actions]

CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes.

[github-actions]

E2E test started on Bitrise: https://app.bitrise.io/app/be69d4368ee7e86d/pipelines/2f9b1066-4e61-40a0-a11f-a796601a1203
You can also kick off another Bitrise E2E smoke test by removing and re-applying the (Run Smoke E2E) label

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (93ce2e2) 40.21% compared to head (fb780dd) 40.21%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #8247   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   40.21%   40.21%           
=======================================
  Files        1234     1234           
  Lines       29883    29883           
  Branches     2862     2862           
=======================================
  Hits        12017    12017           
  Misses      17175    17175           
  Partials      691      691           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[NicolasMassart]

The change in the app is ok for me, but according to the Slack discussion, you should also update e2e for this change:
https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-mobile/blob/main/e2e/selectors/Settings/NetworksView.selectors.js#L13
Ideally this would be part of the requirements for done in the issue. Creating an issue even if you have a Slack thread is a good practice. Consider Slack is not preserving messages indefinitely and is not available to people outside Consensys. Having an issue on the repo itself, even if it seems redundent with the Slack, is good for contributors to understand the code changes.

[salimtb]

The change in the app is ok for me, but according to the Slack discussion, you should also update e2e for this change: https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-mobile/blob/main/e2e/selectors/Settings/NetworksView.selectors.js#L13 Ideally this would be part of the requirements for done in the issue. Creating an issue even if you have a Slack thread is a good practice. Consider Slack is not preserving messages indefinitely and is not available to people outside Consensys. Having an issue on the repo itself, even if it seems redundent with the Slack, is good for contributors to understand the code changes.

hello @NicolasMassart ,
thanks for your comment :) , an issue on github has been created and linked to this PR now, i agree it's a better practice.
regarding the e2e tests, the modification has already been made on thee2e/selectors/Settings/NetworksView.selectors.js file, is there anything else I need to do ?

[cortisiko]

LGTM

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate passed

Kudos, no new issues were introduced!

0 New issues
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[tommasini]

LGTM