[No QA] feat: add unit tests for edit money request and payment via vbba #27609

allroundexperts · 2023-09-16T21:02:23Z

Details

This PR adds unit tests for the Edit money request flow and the payment via ACH flow.

Fixed Issues

$ #26366
PROPOSAL: #26366

Tests

N/A

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

N/A

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 / Chrome
- iOS / native
- iOS / 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 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 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 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(themeColors.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 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 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 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 author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Web

N/A

Mobile Web - Chrome

N/A

Mobile Web - Safari

N/A

Desktop

N/A

iOS

N/A

Android

N/A

melvin-bot · 2023-09-16T21:02:27Z

@thesahindia 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]

thesahindia · 2023-09-17T21:23:49Z

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 / Chrome
- iOS / native
- iOS / 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 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 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(themeColors.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 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

Web

Mobile Web - Chrome

Mobile Web - Safari

Desktop

iOS

Android

mountiny

In general this looks great! I think there is more to cover but I think we can have that in a separate issue and this is good starting point for the coverage. I think ideally we can cover all the payment types, editing in multiple ways etc

@allroundexperts however, I am not sure if the workspace test is actually creating a workspace chat and expense report.

And one thing I would add to this PR is to test the MODIFIEDEXPENSE report action is correctly added to the report and that its message is correct change .... or set ... or removed .... Could you add that into this PR please?

mountiny · 2023-09-18T06:32:35Z

src/libs/actions/IOU.js

-            onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
+            onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.SET,
            key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION}${transactionID}`,
            value: transaction,
        },
        {
-            onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
+            onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.SET,
            key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${iouReport.reportID}`,
            value: iouReport,
        },
        {
-            onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
+            onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.SET,
            key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${iouReport.chatReportID}`,
            value: chatReport,
        },


I am not 100% sure this is the best practice, but from this it seems fine to me to use SET

MERGE merges both previous and the new data. In this case however, we're generating new optimistic objects for transaction, iouReport and chatReport. As such, it makes sense to use SET directly.

This change caused regression.

Issue -> "IOU - Edited amount for a paid request does not revert to initial amount after closing error message"

mountiny · 2023-09-18T06:32:53Z

tests/actions/IOUTest.js

@@ -1372,4 +1373,424 @@ describe('actions/IOU', () => {
                );
        });
    });
+
+    describe('edit requestMoney', () => {


Suggested change

describe('edit requestMoney', () => {

describe('edit money request', () => {

mountiny · 2023-09-18T06:38:34Z

tests/actions/IOUTest.js

+            let chatReport = {};
+
+            fetch.pause();
+            IOU.requestMoney({}, amount, CONST.CURRENCY.USD, '', merchant, RORY_EMAIL, RORY_ACCOUNT_ID, {login: CARLOS_EMAIL, accountID: CARLOS_ACCOUNT_ID}, comment);


Is this creating an expense report on workspace chat though? It seems like its the same as the iou report above and we cannot use the VBBA payment type for that

It wasn't. I have updated it to create a workspace now.

mountiny · 2023-09-25T08:43:26Z

@allroundexperts are you bale to address the feedback please? Thanks!

allroundexperts · 2023-10-08T08:24:36Z

And one thing I would add to this PR is to test the MODIFIEDEXPENSE report action is correctly added to the report and that its message is correct change .... or set ... or removed .... Could you add that into this PR please?

@mountiny This already exists here. I have added another expect statement that would make it more obvious. As far as the messages are concerned, those are generated in the UI itself instead of being stored in the report action. The tests assert on the report actions and ensure that both the old and new comment are accurate.

tests/actions/IOUTest.js

mountiny

Thank you very much @allroundexperts

OSBotify · 2023-10-23T12:03:42Z

✋ 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 · 2023-10-24T02:00:41Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.3.90-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2023-10-25T16:37:35Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 1.3.90-2 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2023-10-25T17:02:35Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.3.91-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2023-10-26T22:44:36Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 1.3.91-8 🚀

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

feat: add unit tests for edit money request and payment via vbba

5d51206

allroundexperts requested a review from a team as a code owner September 16, 2023 21:02

melvin-bot bot requested review from thesahindia and removed request for a team September 16, 2023 21:02

allroundexperts changed the title ~~feat: add unit tests for edit money request and payment via vbba~~ [No QA] feat: add unit tests for edit money request and payment via vbba Sep 16, 2023

allroundexperts mentioned this pull request Sep 16, 2023

[HOLD for payment 2023-11-01] Improve the IOUTest with Edit, delete and payment with ACH #26366

Closed

fix: lint errors

e26835f

aimane-chnaif mentioned this pull request Sep 16, 2023

[No QA] Add automated tests for delete money request #26029

Merged

59 tasks

thesahindia approved these changes Sep 17, 2023

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from mountiny September 17, 2023 21:24

mountiny assigned allroundexperts Sep 18, 2023

mountiny requested changes Sep 18, 2023

View reviewed changes

allroundexperts added 4 commits October 8, 2023 11:39

feat: merge with main

7075af7

feat: resolve conflicts

1bb71f6

fix: lint issues

c1701ee

fix: handle comment suggestions

3b04dfd

allroundexperts requested a review from mountiny October 8, 2023 08:24

allroundexperts added 2 commits October 8, 2023 13:25

fix: lint issues

b9d1a0a

fix: more lint issues

64c1053

mountiny requested changes Oct 9, 2023

View reviewed changes

tests/actions/IOUTest.js Show resolved Hide resolved

tests/actions/IOUTest.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

tests/actions/IOUTest.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

allroundexperts added 3 commits October 22, 2023 21:55

Merge branch 'main' into fix-26366

83fcaaa

fix: remove duplicated policy utils import

9c2df99

fix: handle comment suggestions

c54734a

allroundexperts requested a review from mountiny October 22, 2023 19:08

mountiny approved these changes Oct 23, 2023

View reviewed changes

mountiny merged commit 7b4e898 into Expensify:main Oct 23, 2023
16 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Oct 24, 2023

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2023-10-24 #30224

Closed

43 tasks

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Oct 25, 2023

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2023-10-25 #30365

Closed

99 tasks

bernhardoj mentioned this pull request Nov 21, 2023

[HOLD for payment 2024-01-09] [$500] IOU - Edited amount for a paid request does not revert to initial amount after closing error message #31622

Closed

6 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[No QA] feat: add unit tests for edit money request and payment via vbba #27609

[No QA] feat: add unit tests for edit money request and payment via vbba #27609

allroundexperts commented Sep 16, 2023

melvin-bot bot commented Sep 16, 2023

thesahindia commented Sep 17, 2023

mountiny left a comment

mountiny Sep 18, 2023

allroundexperts Oct 8, 2023

sobitneupane Feb 2, 2024

mountiny Sep 18, 2023

allroundexperts Oct 8, 2023

mountiny Sep 18, 2023

allroundexperts Oct 8, 2023

mountiny commented Sep 25, 2023

allroundexperts commented Oct 8, 2023 •

edited

Loading

mountiny left a comment

OSBotify commented Oct 23, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 24, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 25, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 25, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 26, 2023

	describe('edit requestMoney', () => {
	describe('edit money request', () => {

[No QA] feat: add unit tests for edit money request and payment via vbba #27609

[No QA] feat: add unit tests for edit money request and payment via vbba #27609

Conversation

allroundexperts commented Sep 16, 2023

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented Sep 16, 2023

thesahindia commented Sep 17, 2023

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mountiny Sep 18, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

allroundexperts Oct 8, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sobitneupane Feb 2, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mountiny Sep 18, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

allroundexperts Oct 8, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mountiny Sep 18, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

allroundexperts Oct 8, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mountiny commented Sep 25, 2023

allroundexperts commented Oct 8, 2023 • edited Loading

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

OSBotify commented Oct 23, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 24, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 25, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 25, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 26, 2023

allroundexperts commented Oct 8, 2023 •

edited

Loading