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

Bump Onyx to v2.0.65 #44987

Merged
merged 18 commits into from
Aug 23, 2024
Merged

Conversation

fabioh8010
Copy link
Contributor

@fabioh8010 fabioh8010 commented Jul 8, 2024

Details

This PR includes the necessary changes when bumping Onyx after this PR is merged.

Most of the changes here are just renaming variables and changing types.

Fixed Issues

$ #47143
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

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.2024-08-07.at.18.00.00-compressed.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2024-08-07.at.18.03.55-compressed.mov
iOS: Native
Screen.Recording.2024-08-07.at.18.26.23-compressed.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-08-07.at.18.39.19-compressed.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-08-07.at.18.41.08-compressed.mov
Screen.Recording.2024-08-07.at.18.43.55-compressed.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2024-08-07.at.18.52.43-compressed.mov

Comment on lines +152 to +154
// We exceptionally opt out of reusing the connection here to avoid extra callback calls due to
// an existing connection already made in PersistedRequests.ts.
reuseConnection: false,
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Highlighting this change here.

@fabioh8010 fabioh8010 changed the title [WIP] [POC] Onyx Connection Manager [WIP] Onyx Connection Manager Aug 7, 2024
@mountiny mountiny assigned mountiny and fabioh8010 and unassigned mountiny Aug 14, 2024
@fabioh8010
Copy link
Contributor Author

fabioh8010 commented Aug 20, 2024

@mountiny PR is ready for testing! Could we have full regression test here?

@ikevin127
Copy link
Contributor

From the Onyx PR's description I tested the following:

✅ 1. Open a chat, send a message, react to that message and reply to that message in a thread
✅ 2. Submit an expense and open that expense
✅ 2. Assign a task, open that task and mark it as complete
✅ 3. Go to Settings and change the App theme

Additionally, I tested the following flows:
Track expense, Submit expense, Split expense, Pay someone, Send invoice, Assign task and Quick action for these.

Web - Chat - Sluggish transition between main chat and transition thread

Web - Chat - URL is not hyperlinked on chat composer

Web - Receipt - Delete receipt is not displayed

Web - Receipt - Its not here page is displayed when trying to replace a receipt

Web - Distance - Distance receipt only shows the map

I selected the issues in the above list because out of the entire list, these seem to me to be potential issues on this PR since it's related to onyx connections, but they all passed. Therefore, as @fabioh8010 requested:

Could we have full regression test here?

I think it would be very helpful to have an ad-hoc build here now that the E/App PR is ready and have the QA team's results to go off and triage before moving forward with merging this.

cc @mountiny

Copy link
Contributor

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

Asked QA for testing but it will take some time, probably next week it should be completed.

@fabioh8010 fabioh8010 changed the title [WIP] Onyx Connection Manager Bump Onyx to v2.0.65 Aug 23, 2024
@fabioh8010 fabioh8010 marked this pull request as ready for review August 23, 2024 08:36
@fabioh8010 fabioh8010 requested a review from a team as a code owner August 23, 2024 08:36
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from ikevin127 and removed request for a team August 23, 2024 08:36
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Aug 23, 2024

@ikevin127 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]

@fabioh8010
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ikevin127 @mountiny I've updated the PR to target Onyx v2.0.65 and opened to review.

@ikevin127
Copy link
Contributor

Not sure what to test here (again), I thought we're merging without QA testing and triaging based on Expensify/react-native-onyx#567 (comment) and Expensify/react-native-onyx#567 (review) 🤔

@fabioh8010
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ikevin127 I think you just need to fill checklist then and we proceed to engineer review?

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

@ikevin127 Can you please add the checklist mainly, you have tested already and we are going to see how this behaves in staging

Copy link
Contributor

@ikevin127 ikevin127 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

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

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from mountiny August 23, 2024 18:18
Copy link
Contributor

@mountiny mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks, lets try this out 🚢

@mountiny mountiny merged commit 1e352fd into Expensify:main Aug 23, 2024
20 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.

@kirillzyusko
Copy link
Contributor

@fabioh8010 do you think this PR could introduce performance regression? According to history commits it looks like this:

image

So we have 3 PRs that potentially could introduce a regression:

  • increasing characters limit (but it's related to other page);
  • removing storybooks builds;
  • this PR with onyx that affects a lot of places of the app 🙈

I can not say precisely yet whether this PR exactly introduce a regression (I had to run e2e tests locally and compare results), but just technically - could these changes introduce something that could affect performance in negative side?

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

That was probably this PR indeed out of the options 🙈

@fabioh8010
Copy link
Contributor Author

Being discussed here.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.0.25-0 🚀

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

1 similar comment
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.0.25-0 🚀

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants