Relax check for reviewer checklist #13247

aldo-expensify · 2022-12-01T19:58:07Z

Details

Use indexOf instead of startsWith. It is common for reviewers to add something at the start of the comment that made this check fail.

It is unlikely that we will find ## Reviewer Checklist as part of a comment that is not the real reviewer checklist.

Fixed Issues

$ #13244

Tests

Add a reviewer checklist typing something of top of the comment before the title ## Reviewer Checklist in this PR
Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

QA Steps

Add a reviewer checklist typing something of top of the comment before the title ## Reviewer Checklist in a PR that is under review in App
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:
- iOS / native
- Android / native
- iOS / Safari
- Android / Chrome
- MacOS / Chrome
- 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 was added in all src/languages/* files
- I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and 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 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 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 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(themeColors.componentBG)
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.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

aldo-expensify · 2022-12-01T19:58:37Z

cc @tgolen

melvin-bot · 2022-12-01T20:00:50Z

@rushatgabhane @techievivek One of you needs to 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]

rushatgabhane · 2022-12-02T05:21:55Z

.github/actions/javascript/reviewerChecklist/reviewerChecklist.js

@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ function checkIssueForCompletedChecklist(numberOfChecklistItems) {
                console.log(`Comment ${i} starts with: ${comment.slice(0, 20)}...`);

                // Found the reviewer checklist, so count how many completed checklist items there are
-                if (comment.startsWith(reviewerChecklistStartsWith)) {
+                if (comment.indexOf(reviewerChecklistContains) !== -1) {


NAB:

Suggested change

if (comment.indexOf(reviewerChecklistContains) !== -1) {

if (comment.toLowerCase().includes(reviewerChecklistContains)) {

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/String/includes

Something like this

const reviewerChecklistPattern = /#{0,6}\s?reviewer checklist\n/gi;

and then

if (reviewerChecklistPattern.test(comment)) { // code }

But then this is not a blocker.

Hmm, I believe this /#{0,6}\s?reviewer checklist\n/gi; allows even no #, right? I'm a bit concerned about relaxing the check too much and finding the wrong comment. I also think the regex may be overkill for something so simple.

Agree that it seems over-engineered. I will go forward and merge it.

rushatgabhane · 2022-12-02T05:22:29Z

P.S. i don't think this PR needs a C+

rushatgabhane · 2022-12-02T05:24:58Z

.github/actions/javascript/reviewerChecklist/reviewerChecklist.js

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ const https = require('https');
 const GitHubUtils = require('../../../libs/GithubUtils');

 const pathToReviewerChecklist = 'https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Expensify/App/main/contributingGuides/REVIEWER_CHECKLIST.md';
-const reviewerChecklistStartsWith = '## Reviewer Checklist';
+const reviewerChecklistContains = '## Reviewer Checklist';


To handle the case when a reviewer uses ### instead of ##

Suggested change

const reviewerChecklistContains = '## Reviewer Checklist';

const reviewerChecklistContains = 'Reviewer Checklist';

My suggestion here would be to use regex. Because it can come in any form so let's create a pattern and test it.

The current code change would fine ### Reviewer Checklist just fine, but it wouldn't find # Reviewer Checklist. For now I'll leave as it is, and if we find cases of a reviewer changing the type of heading to a single #, then we can make that change.

techievivek · 2022-12-02T07:10:55Z

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:
- iOS / native
- Android / native
- iOS / Safari
- Android / Chrome
- MacOS / Chrome
- 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 was added in all src/languages/* files
- I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and 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 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(themeColors.componentBG)
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.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

techievivek

Looks good, feel free to self-merge.

aldo-expensify · 2022-12-02T18:06:16Z

I just noticed because of the failed checks that I had to run npm run gh-actions-build

This updated a file that needed to be committed. I also took the opportunity to change the string searched for to # Reviewer Checklist (one hash)

techievivek

Looks good.

OSBotify · 2022-12-03T14:46:57Z

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

mvtglobally · 2022-12-08T03:38:59Z

@aldo-expensify Can you QA this internally?

aldo-expensify · 2022-12-08T18:05:13Z

@aldo-expensify Can you QA this internally?

I think this has to be QA'd when it reaches production, once that happens, I can take care of it

tgolen · 2022-12-08T18:34:53Z

There is no staging or production environment for the GH actions, so this can be QAed as soon as it was merged.

aldo-expensify · 2022-12-08T18:38:37Z

QAing now then!

aldo-expensify · 2022-12-08T21:05:02Z

QA passed: #13442 (comment)

OSBotify · 2022-12-13T22:41:20Z

🚀 Deployed to production by @chiragsalian in version: 1.2.38-6 🚀

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

Relax check for reviewer playlist

42bae2a

aldo-expensify requested a review from a team as a code owner December 1, 2022 19:58

melvin-bot bot requested review from rushatgabhane and techievivek and removed request for a team December 1, 2022 20:00

aldo-expensify self-assigned this Dec 1, 2022

aldo-expensify changed the title ~~Relax check for reviewer playlist~~ Relax check for reviewer checklist Dec 2, 2022

rushatgabhane reviewed Dec 2, 2022

View reviewed changes

techievivek previously approved these changes Dec 2, 2022

View reviewed changes

Build github actions

35aea48

aldo-expensify dismissed techievivek’s stale review via 35aea48 December 2, 2022 18:04

aldo-expensify requested a review from techievivek December 2, 2022 23:08

techievivek approved these changes Dec 3, 2022

View reviewed changes

techievivek merged commit c905c7c into main Dec 3, 2022

techievivek deleted the aldo_improve-reviewer-checklist-check branch December 3, 2022 14:42

francoisl mentioned this pull request Dec 8, 2022

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2022-12-07 #13431

Closed

72 tasks

aldo-expensify mentioned this pull request Dec 8, 2022

[NO QA] Just QAing #13442

Closed

49 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Relax check for reviewer checklist #13247

Relax check for reviewer checklist #13247

aldo-expensify commented Dec 1, 2022

aldo-expensify commented Dec 1, 2022

melvin-bot bot commented Dec 1, 2022

rushatgabhane Dec 2, 2022 •

edited

Loading

techievivek Dec 2, 2022 •

edited

Loading

rushatgabhane Dec 2, 2022

aldo-expensify Dec 2, 2022

techievivek Dec 3, 2022

rushatgabhane commented Dec 2, 2022

rushatgabhane Dec 2, 2022

techievivek Dec 2, 2022 •

edited

Loading

aldo-expensify Dec 2, 2022

techievivek commented Dec 2, 2022 •

edited

Loading

techievivek left a comment •

edited

Loading

aldo-expensify commented Dec 2, 2022 •

edited

Loading

techievivek left a comment

OSBotify commented Dec 3, 2022

mvtglobally commented Dec 8, 2022

aldo-expensify commented Dec 8, 2022

tgolen commented Dec 8, 2022

aldo-expensify commented Dec 8, 2022

aldo-expensify commented Dec 8, 2022

OSBotify commented Dec 13, 2022

	if (comment.indexOf(reviewerChecklistContains) !== -1) {
	if (comment.toLowerCase().includes(reviewerChecklistContains)) {

	const reviewerChecklistContains = '## Reviewer Checklist';
	const reviewerChecklistContains = 'Reviewer Checklist';

Relax check for reviewer checklist #13247

Relax check for reviewer checklist #13247

Conversation

aldo-expensify commented Dec 1, 2022

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

aldo-expensify commented Dec 1, 2022

melvin-bot bot commented Dec 1, 2022

rushatgabhane Dec 2, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

techievivek Dec 2, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rushatgabhane Dec 2, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aldo-expensify Dec 2, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

techievivek Dec 3, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rushatgabhane commented Dec 2, 2022

rushatgabhane Dec 2, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

techievivek Dec 2, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aldo-expensify Dec 2, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

techievivek commented Dec 2, 2022 • edited Loading

Reviewer Checklist

techievivek left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aldo-expensify commented Dec 2, 2022 • edited Loading

techievivek left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

OSBotify commented Dec 3, 2022

mvtglobally commented Dec 8, 2022

aldo-expensify commented Dec 8, 2022

tgolen commented Dec 8, 2022

aldo-expensify commented Dec 8, 2022

aldo-expensify commented Dec 8, 2022

OSBotify commented Dec 13, 2022

rushatgabhane Dec 2, 2022 •

edited

Loading

techievivek Dec 2, 2022 •

edited

Loading

techievivek Dec 2, 2022 •

edited

Loading

techievivek commented Dec 2, 2022 •

edited

Loading

techievivek left a comment •

edited

Loading

aldo-expensify commented Dec 2, 2022 •

edited

Loading