fix: Use local Onyx key to throttle location permission prompts.

[Krishna2323]

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #47800
PROPOSAL: #47800 (comment)

Tests

1. Click FAB > Submit expense > Select scan tab
2. Upload a receipt > Select a participant > Submit
3. Select Not now in allow location modal, the expense should submit
4. Repeat step 1 & 2 and verify allow location modal is not shown again
5. Change the device time to one week in the future
6. Repeat step 1 & 2 and verify allow location modal IS shown
7. Select Not now in allow location modal
8. Select Not now in allow location modal, the expense should submit

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

1. Click FAB > Submit expense > Select scan tab
2. Upload a receipt > Select a participant > Submit
3. Select Not now in allow location modal, the expense should submit
4. Repeat step 1 & 2 and verify allow location modal is not shown again
5. Change the device time to one week in the future
6. Repeat step 1 & 2 and verify allow location modal IS shown
7. Select Not now in allow location modal
8. Select Not now in allow location modal, the expense should submit

QA Steps

1. Click FAB > Submit expense > Select scan tab
2. Upload a receipt > Select a participant > Submit
3. Select Not now in allow location modal, the expense should submit
4. Repeat step 1 & 2 and verify allow location modal is not shown again
5. Change the device time to one week in the future
6. Repeat step 1 & 2 and verify allow location modal IS shown
7. Select Not now in allow location modal
8. Select Not now in allow location modal, the expense should submit

• 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

android_native.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

android_chrome.mp4

iOS: Native

ios_native.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios_safari.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web_chrome.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

desktop_app.mp4

[melvin-bot]

@shubham1206agra 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]

[Krishna2323]

Will provide update today.

[Krishna2323]

@Julesssss @shubham1206agra, sorry for delay, I'm not sure what should we do with the permission prompt on the scan request page.

I'm confused because if we don't get the current location using getCurrentPosition when the modal prompt has already been shown, we won't get the location even if the user has allowed location access. In my opinion (IMO), we shouldn't do anything for this page because if the user has denied it, the prompt will not be shown again afterward.

[shubham1206agra]

Sorry @Krishna2323, I don't follow you.

Can you elaborate the comment?

[Krishna2323]

@shubham1206agra, when we create a scan request through Quick action, the confirmation step is skipped, and we directly call getCurrentPosition. This triggers the default location permission prompt if it hasn’t been shown before or if the permission is set to "Allow once."

In this case, we shouldn't hide the prompt if the confirmation page prompt has already been shown. This is because if we don’t call getCurrentPosition, the coordinates won’t be sent to the backend, even if location permission has been granted. I hope you understand this 😅. it also took me some time to understand the flow.

App/src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepScan/index.native.tsx

Line 269 in f7d8e48

getCurrentPosition(

[shubham1206agra]

@shubham1206agra, when we create a scan request through Quick action, the confirmation step is skipped, and we directly call getCurrentPosition. This triggers the default location permission prompt if it hasn’t been shown before or if the permission is set to "Allow once."

In this case, we shouldn't hide the prompt if the confirmation page prompt has already been shown. This is because if we don’t call getCurrentPosition, the coordinates won’t be sent to the backend, even if location permission has been granted. I hope you understand this 😅. it also took me some time to understand the flow.

App/src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepScan/index.native.tsx

Line 269 in f7d8e48

getCurrentPosition(

If the permission is denied by the user in the modal, then we skip showing the modal for a week, no matter where it was about to show.

[Julesssss]

when we create a scan request through Quick action, the confirmation step is skipped, and we directly call getCurrentPosition

I think I understand. So because of the simpler flow we don't show our custom permission prompt before the native permission is requested?

In this case, we shouldn't hide the prompt if the confirmation page prompt has already been shown.

I think this is a bit confusing because we have both the custom prompt, and the native prompt. If we have already shown the custom prompt, and users accepted, we wouldn't need to show it again anyway, right?

[Krishna2323]

I think this is a bit confusing because we have both the custom prompt, and the native prompt. If we have already shown the custom prompt, and users accepted, we wouldn't need to show it again anyway, right?

Yes, if the location access was granted or denied, the native prompt won't be shown again, it will just give the cords and proceed.

[Julesssss]

Yes, if the location access was granted or denied, the native prompt won't be shown again, it will just give the cords and proceed.

So are we not able to stop calling getLocation... when we know location permission hasn't been given?

[Krishna2323]

So are we not able to stop calling getLocation... when we know location permission hasn't been given?

I think we can. I will try to understand the flow better and respond here soon.

[Krishna2323]

@Julesssss @shubham1206agra, sorry for the delay 🙏🏻. I've been sick for the last three days 🤧.

Let's try to understand the flow better:

Scenario 1 - Location permission is unset (neither denied nor allowed)

1. The user starts an IOU request flow with a receipt and proceeds to the confirmation page.
2. When the user presses the submit button, our custom modal pops up.
3. If the user selects Continue, the native permission prompt will appear with three options: Allow once, Allow while using the app, and Don't Allow.
4. If the user selects either Allow while using the app or Don't Allow, the native permission prompt will not be shown again in any case (neither in Quick action flow nor in the regular one).
5. At this point, since our custom modal has already been shown on the confirmation page, it will not be displayed again unless a week has passed.

Scenario 2 - Location permission is unset (neither denied nor allowed)

1. The user starts an IOU request flow with a receipt and proceeds to the confirmation page.
2. When the user presses the submit button, our custom permission modal pops up.
3. If the user selects Not now on the custom permission modal, the modal will close and the request will be submitted.
4. Since the user selected Not now, the permission status remains unset (unknown to the device).
5. If the user later starts a scan request using the Quick Action flow and tries to submit the expense, the native permission prompt will appear, offering the same three options: Allow once, Allow while using the app, and Don't Allow.
6. If the user selects either Allow while using the app or Don't Allow, the native permission prompt will not be shown again in any case.
7. As in Scenario 1, since our custom modal was already shown on the confirmation page, it will not be displayed again unless a week has passed.

Scenario 3 - Location permission is unset (neither denied nor allowed)

1. Similar to the flow above, if the user selects Allow once, the native prompt will be shown every time the user restarts the app and goes through the Quick Action scan flow.
2. Our custom modal will not been shown unless a week has been passed.

IMO, what we have now (above scenarios) is the correct, but let me know if you think otherwise.

Result with current implementation (Changes in this PR)

geolocation_permission_flow.1.mp4

[Julesssss]

Similar to the flow above, if the user selects Allow once, the native prompt will be shown every time the user restarts the app and goes through the Quick Action scan flow.

Thank you for the detailed notes. It's a bit of an edge case given that users must select yes to our prompt, but once to the iOS prompt (and only occurs on iOS). However, it does suck that our quick flow is blocked by the annoying iOS prompt.

@shubham1206agra if it was possible to disable the check entirely for the quick action iOS flow with a unique param, I think that would be preferable. I'm going to share this for additional thoughts in the issue.

Alternatively, do we get a response from the iOS permission (getLocation) request? Are we able to detect the users choice? If we could detect users who have selected 'Only Once' that would be ideal, but I fear this is going to be unlikely.

[shubham1206agra]

@Krishna2323 Please see above comment.

[Julesssss]

Ah yes sorry, I meant to tag you @Krishna2323 -- I looked at reviewers 🤦

[Julesssss]

Hey @Krishna2323. let's move forward with the known iOS issue where the prompt occurs in the quick action flow 👍

[Krishna2323]

Hey @Krishna2323. let's move forward with the known iOS issue where the prompt occurs in the quick action flow 👍

I think we can move forward with the current changes then, I will update the checklist tomorrow.

[Krishna2323]

@shubham1206agra, you can start reviewing this.

[Krishna2323]

Thanks for pointing out the bug, @shubham1206agra. You meant to say that if we set the Onyx key to not show the permission modal on onGrant, the location will not be fetched for the second time because of the locationPermissionGranted check here, right? I have removed IOU.updateLastLocationPermissionPrompt(); from onGrant callback.

App/src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx

Lines 497 to 498 in 4c9a3fb

	// If the transaction amount is zero, then the money is being requested through the "Scan" flow and the GPS coordinates need to be included.
	if (transaction.amount === 0 && !isSharingTrackExpense && !isCategorizingTrackExpense && locationPermissionGranted) {

[Krishna2323]

@shubham1206agra friendly bump.

[Krishna2323]

@shubham1206agra, bump ^

[shubham1206agra]

@Krishna2323 Please resolve conflicts

[Krishna2323]

done.

[shubham1206agra]

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

Screen.Recording.2024-10-03.at.4.40.35.PM.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2024-10-03.at.4.56.38.PM.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-10-03.at.4.21.06.PM.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-10-03.at.4.17.47.PM.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2024-10-03.at.4.46.19.PM.mov

[shubham1206agra]

@Julesssss Bump here

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, Desktop, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/android/48237/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/ios/48237/index.html
Desktop 💻	Web 🕸️
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/desktop/48237/NewExpensify.dmg	https://48237.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[Julesssss]

Okay this tested well for me after adjusting my test device time. I'll add a test for QA.

@Krishna2323 could you please just merge main before I merge? Thanks

[Krishna2323]

main merged.

[OSBotify]

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

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 9.0.47-1 🚀

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

[IuliiaHerets]

This PR is failing for Web because of issue #50594

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 9.0.47-4 🚀

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