fix: activation flow

[maxswjeon]

Fixed

• Loading Icon
• Text Update

Not fixed

• Validation
  The regex used for activation key check is /^[0-9a-f]+\/[0-9a-f]{40}$/, but it does not exclude private key validation.
  Need to use more strict activation key check.

[Akamig]

The regex used for activation key check is /^[0-9a-f]+/[0-9a-f]{40}$/, but it does not exclude private key validation.
Need to use more strict activation key check.

Um... Unfortunately our activation key which consists of privatekey/address pair, the latter doesn't addresses former, instead, using activationKeyNonce for generating that for some reason, so basically in order to 'properly' validate if this is proper activation key, that we need to query the nonce value and do... some weird stuff. I did try once, but seems not worth the effort much, since mostly users are going to be copypasting.

https://github.com/planetarium/lib9c/blob/v100361/Lib9c/Model/State/PendingActivationState.cs#L31

[Akamig]

Except that, this LGTM!

[maxswjeon]

Just for clarification of the bug that occured in the internal QA. (cc: @Gilhwan)
onChange validation works, but the difference between auto-paste (focus handler) and the manual-paste was the cursor location, resulting the change of the activation key location differ.

For more easy understanding, let's say | is the cursor location.

• Auto-paste makes the cursor location here.
  |abcedfgef/someaddresshere
• Manual-paste makes the cursor location here.
  abcdefgef/someaddresshere|

resulting the person who is in QA to make a change
|abc d efgef/someaddresshere when auto-pasted, and
`abcdefgef/somea d dresshere when manual-pasted

Since the regex does not check the length on the left side of the / (the private side of the activation key), it passes the naive activation key test

[maxswjeon]

Some big changes:

• Ditched Subview, renamed to View and provided each routes per view.
• Removed MissingActivationView, since it is not required after the update.

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 332 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Large
Size       : +138 -194
Percentile : 73.2%

Total files changed: 13

Change summary by file extension:
.tsx : +138 -185
.ts : +0 -9

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.