Add HybridApp deploy when we deploy staging #42166

AndrewGable · 2024-05-14T19:08:25Z

Details

Adds the HybridApp deploy workflow call when we are deploying to staging.

Fixed Issues

Related #37858

Tests

Merge this PR
Verify that we trigger a deploy on HybridApp (Mobile-Deploy) repo

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

N/A

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

N/A - Deploy only

Android: mWeb Chrome

N/A - Deploy only

iOS: Native

N/A - Deploy only

iOS: mWeb Safari

N/A - Deploy only

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

N/A - Deploy only

MacOS: Desktop

N/A - Deploy only

melvin-bot · 2024-05-14T19:08:30Z

@ 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]

AndrewGable · 2024-05-15T16:21:05Z

Ready for review, I think the one interesting thing will be seeing what happens when HybridApp fails to build.. Not sure if we can basically ignore the errors? continue-on-error: true I don't think will work here

AndrewGable · 2024-05-16T17:48:59Z

I looked into the continue-on-error: true configuration and I don't think it will work here, so let's just go with the current code for now

roryabraham · 2024-05-18T04:30:17Z

Well if no other jobs are dependent upon the HybridApp build job (i.e: via needs, then if it fails it shouldn't cause other jobs to be skipped or to fail.

There is some code to create "investigate failed workflow" issues, but maybe that's a feature not a bug?

One thing I'm wondering is - does OldApp have a staging branch? Do we always want to kick of OldApp builds on main?

AndrewGable · 2024-05-20T16:46:45Z

Yeah I think it's fine without the error checking for now, but we will probably need some real world experience to properly judge.

Do we always want to kick of OldApp builds on main?

Yes, that is what we do now and I think we should continue

AndrewGable · 2024-05-23T16:45:23Z

Off hold

.github/workflows/platformDeploy.yml

Co-authored-by: Rory Abraham <[email protected]>

roryabraham

LGTM, nice and simple 👍🏼

roryabraham · 2024-05-24T20:24:02Z

tests are failing though

AndrewGable · 2024-05-31T17:15:14Z

I'm not 100% we can actually mock this re-usbale workflow: kiegroup/act-js#54

AndrewGable · 2024-05-31T17:19:07Z

Maybe there is a way to reconfigure it to run on a step.. I'll look

roryabraham · 2024-06-03T21:32:28Z

.github/workflows/platformDeploy.yml

+    if: ${{ fromJSON(needs.validateActor.outputs.IS_DEPLOYER) }}
+    steps:
+      - name: 'Deploy HybridApp'
+        if: ${{ !fromJSON(env.SHOULD_DEPLOY_PRODUCTION) }}


Why did you move this if to a step level instead of the job level?

I had to move the entire job to a step for the tests to pass: #42166 (comment)

I just copied the existing step level if from all the other steps, but happy to adjust if there is something better

kind of lame that the limitations in the tests are driving the workflow design, but in this case I guess it doesn't matter too much. This looks like it should work.

roryabraham · 2024-06-03T21:46:15Z

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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

OSBotify · 2024-06-03T21:58:59Z

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

AndrewGable · 2024-06-04T14:44:04Z

This did not work and we are going to revert it.

https://github.com/Expensify/App/actions/runs/9369120503

OSBotify · 2024-06-06T12:34:15Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 1.4.79-11 🚀

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

Add HybridApp deploy when we deploy staging

1d58aee

AndrewGable requested a review from roryabraham May 14, 2024 19:08

AndrewGable self-assigned this May 14, 2024

AndrewGable requested a review from a team as a code owner May 14, 2024 19:08

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team May 14, 2024 19:08

Tweak to github env variable

a78fbcf

AndrewGable changed the title ~~[HOLD Mobile-Deploy PR #128]Add HybridApp deploy when we deploy staging~~ Add HybridApp deploy when we deploy staging May 15, 2024

AndrewGable changed the title ~~Add HybridApp deploy when we deploy staging~~ [HOLD]Add HybridApp deploy when we deploy staging May 21, 2024

AndrewGable changed the title ~~[HOLD]Add HybridApp deploy when we deploy staging~~ Add HybridApp deploy when we deploy staging May 23, 2024

roryabraham requested changes May 23, 2024

View reviewed changes

.github/workflows/platformDeploy.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Update .github/workflows/platformDeploy.yml

03ad341

Co-authored-by: Rory Abraham <[email protected]>

roryabraham previously approved these changes May 24, 2024

View reviewed changes

AndrewGable added 2 commits May 31, 2024 10:19

Merge branch 'main' into andrew-hybrid-app-deploy

dd581c4

Start fixing tests

367b369

AndrewGable dismissed roryabraham’s stale review via 367b369 May 31, 2024 16:33

Fix ID

0d10695

AndrewGable added 5 commits May 31, 2024 11:19

Try mocking hybridApp

697e9ab

Add assertion

d2d455f

Fix test

e24d160

Fix lint

50dd4e3

Fix ts

03a564d

AndrewGable requested a review from roryabraham June 1, 2024 00:07

roryabraham reviewed Jun 3, 2024

View reviewed changes

roryabraham approved these changes Jun 3, 2024

View reviewed changes

roryabraham merged commit 9a63031 into main Jun 3, 2024
17 of 20 checks passed

roryabraham deleted the andrew-hybrid-app-deploy branch June 3, 2024 21:50

AndrewGable mentioned this pull request Jun 4, 2024

[CP Staging] Revert "Add HybridApp deploy when we deploy staging" #43035

Merged

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Jun 4, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-06-04 #43037

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add HybridApp deploy when we deploy staging #42166

Add HybridApp deploy when we deploy staging #42166

AndrewGable commented May 14, 2024 •

edited

Loading

melvin-bot bot commented May 14, 2024

AndrewGable commented May 15, 2024

AndrewGable commented May 16, 2024

roryabraham commented May 18, 2024

AndrewGable commented May 20, 2024

AndrewGable commented May 23, 2024

roryabraham left a comment

roryabraham commented May 24, 2024

AndrewGable commented May 31, 2024

AndrewGable commented May 31, 2024 •

edited

Loading

roryabraham Jun 3, 2024

AndrewGable Jun 3, 2024

roryabraham Jun 3, 2024

roryabraham commented Jun 3, 2024

OSBotify commented Jun 3, 2024

AndrewGable commented Jun 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

OSBotify commented Jun 6, 2024

Add HybridApp deploy when we deploy staging #42166

Add HybridApp deploy when we deploy staging #42166

Conversation

AndrewGable commented May 14, 2024 • edited Loading

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented May 14, 2024

AndrewGable commented May 15, 2024

AndrewGable commented May 16, 2024

roryabraham commented May 18, 2024

AndrewGable commented May 20, 2024

AndrewGable commented May 23, 2024

roryabraham left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

roryabraham commented May 24, 2024

AndrewGable commented May 31, 2024

AndrewGable commented May 31, 2024 • edited Loading

roryabraham Jun 3, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AndrewGable Jun 3, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

roryabraham Jun 3, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

roryabraham commented Jun 3, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

OSBotify commented Jun 3, 2024

AndrewGable commented Jun 4, 2024 • edited Loading

OSBotify commented Jun 6, 2024

AndrewGable commented May 14, 2024 •

edited

Loading

AndrewGable commented May 31, 2024 •

edited

Loading

AndrewGable commented Jun 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading