Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[OldDot Rules Migration] Individual expense rules #47409

Merged

Conversation

WojtekBoman
Copy link
Contributor

@WojtekBoman WojtekBoman commented Aug 14, 2024

Details

This PR adds a new section to the Rules Page: Individual expense rules. This section allows the user to:

  • update the receipt required amount
  • update the max expense amount
  • update the max expense age
  • enable or disable the billable mode
  • enable or disable eReceipts

Implementation details on how the actions listed above work can be found here

Fixed Issues

$ #47013
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Precondition: Make sure you have access to the workspaceRules beta. If you run the app locally you can modify the canUseWorkspaceRules or canUseAllBetas function in Permissions.ts to always return true.

  1. Open the settings of any workspace.
  2. Enable rules if they are disabled for the selected workspace. This feature can be enabled on the More Features page.
  3. Check that the buttons in the first section work correctly in offline and online mode (check that values ​​are updated correctly, that the correct screens are opened, etc.)

Offline tests

QA Steps

  • 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
Screen.Recording.2024-08-23.at.12.38.25.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2024-08-23.at.12.43.07.mp4
iOS: Native
Screen.Recording.2024-08-23.at.11.50.35.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-08-23.at.12.34.35.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-08-23.at.14.42.29.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2024-08-23.at.11.45.01.mov

Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Aug 20, 2024

Hey! I see that you made changes to our Form component. Make sure to update the docs in FORMS.md accordingly. Cheers!

@WojtekBoman WojtekBoman changed the title Rules/individual expense rules [OldDot Rules Migration] Individual expense rules Aug 20, 2024
src/ONYXKEYS.ts Outdated
Comment on lines 618 to 620
RULES_REQUIRED_RECEIPT_AMOUNT_FORM: 'RulesRequiredReceiptAmountForm',
RULES_MAX_EXPENSE_AMOUNT_FORM: 'RulesMaxExpenseAmountForm',
RULES_MAX_EXPENSE_AGE_FORM: 'RulesMaxExpenseAgeForm',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've been using _MODAL_FORM in the naming - I'd suggest unifying it, but there are many cases where a standard _FORM has been applied, so it can go either way 🤷

Comment on lines +46 to +48
label?: string;

displayAsTextInput?: boolean;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'll add descriptions for both in my PR

Comment on lines 79 to 97
renderSubtitle={() => (
<Text style={[styles.flexRow, styles.alignItemsCenter, styles.w100, styles.mt2]}>
<Text style={[styles.textNormal, styles.colorMuted]}>{translate('workspace.rules.individualExpenseRules.subtitle')}</Text>{' '}
<TextLink
style={styles.link}
onPress={handleOnPressCategoriesLink}
>
{translate('workspace.common.categories').toLowerCase()}
</TextLink>{' '}
<Text style={[styles.textNormal, styles.colorMuted]}>{translate('common.and')}</Text>{' '}
<TextLink
style={styles.link}
onPress={handleOnPressTagsLink}
>
{translate('workspace.common.tags').toLowerCase()}
</TextLink>
.
</Text>
)}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'd move this to a separate function or component

Comment on lines 102 to 112
<MenuItemWithTopDescription
key={translate('workspace.rules.individualExpenseRules.receiptRequiredAmount')}
shouldShowRightIcon
title={maxExpenseAmountNoReceiptText}
description={translate('workspace.rules.individualExpenseRules.receiptRequiredAmount')}
onPress={() => {
Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.RULES_RECEIPT_REQUIRED_AMOUNT.getRoute(policyID));
}}
wrapperStyle={[styles.sectionMenuItemTopDescription]}
numberOfLinesTitle={2}
/>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In my PR moving item content to the array was more necessary, because I had a lot of nested items, but here most of the items have very similar configurations and this would benefit readability a lot because we'd avoid repeating the components and this would be easier to expand in the future


return (
<AccessOrNotFoundWrapper
policyID={route.params.policyID ?? '-1'}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

is '-1' required? I think it was accepting undefined value

const {inputCallbackRef} = useAutoFocusInput();
const policy = usePolicy(route.params.policyID);

const defaultValue = policy?.maxExpenseAge === CONST.DISABLED_MAX_EXPENSE_VALUE || !policy?.maxExpenseAge ? '' : `${policy?.maxExpenseAge}`;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

maybe maxExpenseAgeDefaultValue?

Comment on lines 36 to 40
let age;
if (!maxExpenseAge) {
age = CONST.DISABLED_MAX_EXPENSE_VALUE;
}
age = parseInt(maxExpenseAge, 10);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

maybe ternary?


type RulesReceiptRequiredAmountPageProps = StackScreenProps<SettingsNavigatorParamList, typeof SCREENS.WORKSPACE.RULES_RECEIPT_REQUIRED_AMOUNT>;

function RulesReceiptRequiredAmountPage({route}: RulesReceiptRequiredAmountPageProps) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

you're using route.params.policyID in many places, can't we destructure it on the props level?

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from brunovjk and removed request for a team August 23, 2024 12:57
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Aug 23, 2024

@brunovjk 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]

@WojtekBoman
Copy link
Contributor Author

@marcaaron

I have one question. When we upgrade the policy, default max expense amounts are set:

function upgradeToCorporate(policyID: string, featureName: string) {
    const policy = getPolicy(policyID);
    const optimisticData: OnyxUpdate[] = [
        {
            onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
            key: `policy_${policyID}`,
            value: {
                isPendingUpgrade: true,
                type: CONST.POLICY.TYPE.CORPORATE,
                // HERE DEFAULTS ARE SET
                maxExpenseAge: CONST.POLICY.DEFAULT_MAX_EXPENSE_AGE,
                maxExpenseAmount: CONST.POLICY.DEFAULT_MAX_EXPENSE_AMOUNT,
                maxExpenseAmountNoReceipt: CONST.POLICY.DEFAULT_MAX_AMOUNT_NO_RECEIPT,
                glCodes: true,
                ...(PolicyUtils.isInstantSubmitEnabled(policy) && {
                    autoReporting: true,
                    autoReportingFrequency: CONST.POLICY.AUTO_REPORTING_FREQUENCIES.IMMEDIATE,
                }),
                harvesting: {
                    enabled: false,
                },
            },
        },
    ];
    
    // CONST.ts
    
      DEFAULT_MAX_EXPENSE_AGE: 90,
      DEFAULT_MAX_EXPENSE_AMOUNT: 200000,
      DEFAULT_MAX_AMOUNT_NO_RECEIPT: 2500,    

Is this code still valid or should we set all these values to 10000000000?

Comment on lines 3652 to 3653
receiptRequiredAmount: 'Monto requerido para recibo',
receiptRequiredAmountDescription: 'Requiere recibos cuando el gasto excede este monto, a menos que una regla de categoría lo anule.',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
receiptRequiredAmount: 'Monto requerido para recibo',
receiptRequiredAmountDescription: 'Requiere recibos cuando el gasto excede este monto, a menos que una regla de categoría lo anule.',
receiptRequiredAmount: 'Cantidad requerida para los recibos',
receiptRequiredAmountDescription: 'Exige recibos cuando los gastos superen este importe, a menos que lo anule una regla de categoría.',

Comment on lines 3654 to 3655
maxExpenseAmount: 'Monto máximo de gasto',
maxExpenseAmountDescription: 'Marca el gasto que excede este monto, a menos que una regla de categoría lo anule.',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
maxExpenseAmount: 'Monto máximo de gasto',
maxExpenseAmountDescription: 'Marca el gasto que excede este monto, a menos que una regla de categoría lo anule.',
maxExpenseAmount: 'Importe máximo del gasto',
maxExpenseAmountDescription: 'Marca los gastos que superen este importe, a menos que una regla de categoría lo anule.',

Comment on lines 3656 to 3657
maxAge: 'Edad máxima',
maxExpenseAge: 'Antigüedad máxima de gasto',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
maxAge: 'Edad máxima',
maxExpenseAge: 'Antigüedad máxima de gasto',
maxAge: 'Antigüedad máxima',
maxExpenseAge: 'Antigüedad máxima de los gastos',

maxExpenseAmountDescription: 'Marca el gasto que excede este monto, a menos que una regla de categoría lo anule.',
maxAge: 'Edad máxima',
maxExpenseAge: 'Antigüedad máxima de gasto',
maxExpenseAgeDescription: 'Marca los gastos con más de un número específico de días.',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
maxExpenseAgeDescription: 'Marca los gastos con más de un número específico de días.',
maxExpenseAgeDescription: 'Marca los gastos de más de un número determinado de días.',

maxExpenseAgeDays: (age: number) => `${age} ${Str.pluralize('día', 'días', age)}`,
billableDefault: 'Valor predeterminado facturable',
billableDefaultDescription:
'Elige si los gastos en efectivo y con tarjeta de crédito deben ser facturables por defecto. Los gastos facturables se habilitan o deshabilitan en etiquetas',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
'Elige si los gastos en efectivo y con tarjeta de crédito deben ser facturables por defecto. Los gastos facturables se habilitan o deshabilitan en etiquetas',
'Elige si los gastos en efectivo y con tarjeta de crédito deben ser facturables por defecto. Los gastos facturables se activan o desactivan en',

billableDefaultDescription:
'Elige si los gastos en efectivo y con tarjeta de crédito deben ser facturables por defecto. Los gastos facturables se habilitan o deshabilitan en etiquetas',
billable: 'Facturable',
billableDescription: 'Los gastos se vuelven a facturar a los clientes con mayor frecuencia',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
billableDescription: 'Los gastos se vuelven a facturar a los clientes con mayor frecuencia',
billableDescription: 'Los gastos se vuelven a facturar a los clientes en la mayoría de los casos',

billable: 'Facturable',
billableDescription: 'Los gastos se vuelven a facturar a los clientes con mayor frecuencia',
nonBillable: 'No facturable',
nonBillableDescription: 'Los gastos ocasionalmente se vuelven a facturar a los clientes',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
nonBillableDescription: 'Los gastos ocasionalmente se vuelven a facturar a los clientes',
nonBillableDescription: 'Los gastos se vuelven a facturar a los clientes en ocasiones',

Comment on lines 3668 to 3669
eReceiptsHint: 'El Recibos electrónicos se crean automáticamente para',
eReceiptsHintLink: 'la mayoría de las transacciones con crédito en USD',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
eReceiptsHint: 'El Recibos electrónicos se crean automáticamente para',
eReceiptsHintLink: 'la mayoría de las transacciones con crédito en USD',
eReceiptsHint: 'Los recibos electrónicos se crean automáticamente',
eReceiptsHintLink: 'para la mayoría de las transacciones en USD',

@shawnborton
Copy link
Contributor

Screenshots look pretty good to me!

@marcaaron
Copy link
Contributor

Is this code still valid or should we set all these values to 10000000000?

@WojtekBoman What you have there appears to be correct. When the API is called to upgrade to corporate those are the default values we set.

SET_POLICY_EXPENSE_MAX_AMOUNT: 'SetPolicyExpenseMaxAmount',
SET_POLICY_EXPENSE_MAX_AGE: ' SetPolicyExpenseMaxAge',
SET_POLICY_BILLABLE_MODE: ' SetPolicyBillableMode',
SET_WORKSPACE_ERECEIPTS_ENABLED: 'SetWorkspaceEReceiptsEnabled',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Note to myself that I will create some issue to fix this as polish.

@marcaaron
Copy link
Contributor

Looks great so far!

@brunovjk

This comment was marked as outdated.

@WojtekBoman
Copy link
Contributor Author

I don't have beta access right now, so I set canUseWorkspaceRules to true. However, the fields in the Individual expense rules section show default values instead of being blank, as shown in the PR screenshot:

video
Screenshot 2024-08-24 at 14 59 51

The fields are editable, and everything else works well. Could this behavior be related to not having beta access? Should we be concerned about this? Thanks.

cc: @WojtekBoman @marcaaron

I mentioned it here. When we upgrade our policy, the default values for rules are set

@brunovjk
Copy link
Contributor

@WojtekBoman What you have there appears to be correct. When the API is called to upgrade to corporate those are the default values we set.

Sorry, I missed that. I'm testing on all platforms and will fill out the checklist.

@brunovjk
Copy link
Contributor

Excuse @WojtekBoman, what should happen when we save a 'max expense age' equal to the maximum limit? Thanks.

Screen.Recording.2024-08-26.at.10.29.55.mov

@WojtekBoman
Copy link
Contributor Author

WojtekBoman commented Aug 26, 2024

Excuse @WojtekBoman, what should happen when we save a 'max expense age' equal to the maximum limit? Thanks.

Screen.Recording.2024-08-26.at.10.29.55.mov

I asked about it here @marcaaron Could you take a look at it?

@brunovjk
Copy link
Contributor

brunovjk commented Aug 26, 2024

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
47409_android_native.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
47409_android_web.mov
iOS: Native
47409_ios_native.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
47409_ios_web.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
47409_browser.mov
MacOS: Desktop
47409_desktop.mov

@brunovjk
Copy link
Contributor

I can reproduce this issue in the 'receipt required amount' and 'max expense amount' fields (in native only).

47409_dupe_issue_native.mov

Copy link
Contributor

@brunovjk brunovjk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Miding those comments: #comment_1 and #comment_2 everything else LGTM.

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from marcaaron August 26, 2024 15:26
Copy link
Contributor

@marcaaron marcaaron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@marcaaron marcaaron merged commit cc9b8b7 into Expensify:main Aug 26, 2024
17 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

✋ 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
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 9.0.26-1 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 9.0.26-6 🚀

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

@@ -402,6 +407,17 @@ function BaseTextInput(
defaultValue={defaultValue}
markdownStyle={markdownStyle}
/>
{!!suffixCharacter && (
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We missed adding suffix handling to native (#54363), so we added it in #54549

const policyCurrency = policy?.outputCurrency ?? CONST.CURRENCY.USD;

const maxExpenseAmountNoReceiptText = useMemo(() => {
if (policy?.maxExpenseAmountNoReceipt === CONST.DISABLED_MAX_EXPENSE_VALUE || !policy?.maxExpenseAmountNoReceipt) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We shouldn't had returned empty string if the amount was 0, this caused #54290

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.

9 participants