Bump react-native-live-markdown to 0.1.192 (LOOSE_URL_WEBSITE_REGEX rewrite)

[s77rt]

Explanation of Change

• Updated react-native-live-markdown
• Patched html-entities (required for react-native-live-markdown as seen in https://github.com/Expensify/react-native-live-markdown/tree/c35696d8a65ffe06d1acc066a9ff2a17b01eb77d/patches)
• Patched react-native-reanimated (fixing bug https://github.com/Expensify/react-native-live-markdown/issues/574, upstream PR)
• Mocked react-native-live-markdown (required for existing tests to pass)

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/52475 PROPOSAL: https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/52475#issuecomment-2510386095

Tests

1. Open any chat
2. Type ![test](https://camo.githubusercontent.com/4848d0f965f332077b77a1a0488c3e66b4769032104f4de6890bae218b4add8d/68747470733a2f2f70696373756d2e70686f746f732f69642f313036372f3230302f333030 )_test
3. Verify the app doesn't lag or crash

• [X] Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as Tests

QA Steps

Same as Tests

• [X] Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

• [X] I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• [X] I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • [X] I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • [X] I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • [X] I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • [X] I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • [X] 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)
  • [X] 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).
• [X] I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• [X] I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • [X] Android: Native
  • [X] Android: mWeb Chrome
  • [X] iOS: Native
  • [X] iOS: mWeb Safari
  • [X] MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • [X] MacOS: Desktop
• [X] 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)
• [X] I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
  • [X] 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)
  • [X] I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • [X] 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.
  • [X] I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • [X] If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
  • [X] I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • [X] 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)
  • [X] 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.
  • [X] I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• [X] If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• [X] I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• [X] 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)
• [X] I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• [X] I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• [X] I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• [X] If any new file was added I verified that:
  • [X] 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
• [X] If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • [X] A similar style doesn't already exist
  • [X] The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
• [X] 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.
• [X] 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)
• [X] 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.
• [X] 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.
• [X] 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:
  • [X] I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • [X] I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• [X] 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.
• [X] I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
• [X] 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

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/618261c9-1af1-42c4-895a-fa7e911c8f58

Android: mWeb Chrome

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/fd1e624d-45e5-41cb-b674-34658fcf643e

iOS: Native

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/3bc767d0-fa39-45f4-8a1a-95803cb1047a

iOS: mWeb Safari

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/81b7ccbd-d83e-4a82-bffe-ae878a40e4c4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/2f846dbb-d1b7-4649-80d2-20e83d9df96f

MacOS: Desktop

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f198566e-1040-45cc-a74c-a60f42bb43f7

[melvin-bot[bot]]

@ntdiary 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]

[ntdiary]

Reviewer Checklist

• [x] I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
• [x] I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• [x] I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
  • [x] I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
  • [x] I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
  • [x] 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)
  • [x] 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)
• [x] I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
• [x] I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• [x] I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
  • [x] Android: Native
  • [x] Android: mWeb Chrome
  • [x] iOS: Native
  • [x] iOS: mWeb Safari
  • [x] MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • [x] MacOS: Desktop
• [x] 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
• [x] I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
  • [x] 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).
  • [x] I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • [x] 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.
  • [x] I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  • [x] I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • [x] 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)
  • [x] 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.
  • [x] I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• [x] If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• [x] I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• [x] 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)
• [x] I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• [x] I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• [x] If a new component is created I verified that:
  • [x] A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
  • [x] All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
  • [x] The file is named correctly
  • [x] The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
  • [x] The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
  • [x] 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)
  • [x] 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)
  • [x] All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
  • [x] 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
• [x] If any new file was added I verified that:
  • [x] 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
• [x] If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • [x] A similar style doesn't already exist
  • [x] The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
• [x] 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.
• [x] 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)
• [x] 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.
• [x] 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.
• [x] 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:
  • [x] I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • [x] I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• [x] 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.
• [x] For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this flow.
• [x] 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.
• [x] I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/78c5a476-7309-476c-b76e-e0e9f2ba9c95

Android: mWeb Chrome

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a1127d36-63e2-4ffc-aedd-74278def0aff

iOS: Native

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/67e99a5b-7d2f-4935-a486-a6c307870396

iOS: mWeb Safari

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f5f5dbc9-0581-49b1-b8a6-09868effb4e9

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b7397882-95a6-4e13-82cf-c2979f42e6ca

MacOS: Desktop

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/cd919e4e-9cf2-4683-b9f8-54d782875cb1

[ntdiary]

Hi, @s77rt, could you please confirm whether it can be reproduced? 😂

`function`
```js
Console.log('hello');
```

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/02e5f808-2af2-4b7f-9923-7b8f8be6a9c6

seems the js suffix will cause error?

[tomekzaw]

@ntdiary As for the bug you've mentioned https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/53627#issuecomment-2531814486:

• Parsing blockquotes with some characters after opening triple backticks (in the same line) is broken
• It is not a regression as it also happens on current prod (native iOS) – the formatting disappears if you do so (this is the expected "safe" way to handle such parsing errors)
• The new behavior is that in dev mode you get a warning and error in the LogBox so you know there's some problem
• I've already reported this as a bug in react-native-live-markdown repo:
  • https://github.com/Expensify/react-native-live-markdown/issues/571
• Probably this needs to be fixed in expensify-common
• I think this can be addressed separately (since from now on we'll be able to bump expensify-common in E/App independently from react-native-live-markdown) but perhaps this will also require change in parseExpensiMark function which currently still lives in react-native-live-markdown but we'd like to upstream it to E/App at some point in the future

[s77rt]

@Kicu Good call! Updated!

[Kicu]

@ntdiary @s77rt about this bug in parsing codeblocks: https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/53627#issuecomment-2531814486

I updated the issue that Tomasz created, check here: https://github.com/Expensify/react-native-live-markdown/issues/571#issuecomment-2535825404

We can move forward with this PR, and we will bump live-markdown once codeblocks are fixed.

[ntdiary]

Only the Android app is still building, will fill the checklist soon. :D

[ntdiary]

Is the old version patch cached? 🤔

[pecanoro]

I added https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/45154 to the list of issues since this PR is bumping the packages to solve that issue as well.

[s77rt]

@dangrous Can you please re-trigger this test https://github.com/Expensify/App/actions/runs/12273874071/

[dangrous]

triggered!

[s77rt]

@dangrous That failing test is a false positive. I don't know why it sometimes still see the old patch. Can you trigger it once again

[dangrous]

Hm I can try - maybe need to merge main?

[dangrous]

Okay great, that passed. Can we go ahead and merge, or are there any other moving pieces we need to wait for and or test for?

[s77rt]

Please hold. A patch has been removed recently and this PR is adding it again. Will remove it...

[s77rt]

It seems that the test failure is a regression from https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/50559/files#r1881064349

[s77rt]

@dangrous Should we just ignore the test here?

[dangrous]

I got the test to pass once, so I think maybe it's flaky? I'm running it one more time - I'd definitely prefer not to merge with the failing test. Do you know if someone's working on it?

[s77rt]

It did pass once when @puneetlath re-triggered the test (maybe something different was done?). Or can we just clear the cache for this one? Another option is to revert https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/50559 but I think it's better not to

[Kicu]

Are we talking about the reassure perf test? Why is it even failing. The test suite itself looks ok, since the baseline perf gets correctly generated.

It fails on doing a git merge before it even starts running the suite again to measure performance

HEAD is now at ec31cbc Merge bebb92a0d5cffaf52124a5ea66c071b8e6904c2b into 50c1db81004285968c6388bc941860f554d411e6
hint: Recursive merging with submodules currently only supports trivial cases.
Auto-merging .github/workflows/deploy.yml
Auto-merging .github/workflows/testBuildHybrid.yml
Failed to merge submodule Mobile-Expensify (not checked out)
CONFLICT (submodule): Merge conflict in Mobile-Expensify
Auto-merging android/app/build.gradle
Auto-merging fastlane/Fastfile
Auto-merging ios/NewExpensify.xcodeproj/project.pbxproj

[luacmartins]

Are perf tests the last thing missing here?

[ntdiary]

Are perf tests the last thing missing here?

I think so, and not sure why it failed, could it be due to some kind of caching? My local repo can check it out normally.

[luacmartins]

I think this is either caching or something that we need to fix after we migrated the Mobile-Expensify submodule to App: @Julesssss

Failed to merge submodule Mobile-Expensify (not checked out)
CONFLICT (submodule): Merge conflict in Mobile-Expensify

[luacmartins]

I think we're ok to merge this with the failing test since the conflict is in Mobile-E

[luacmartins]

I'll check with other deployers first

[luacmartins]

First, I'll try to delete the caches and run the tests again

[luacmartins]

Same error without cache hits

[luacmartins]

Started a discussion in Slack

[luacmartins]

@s77rt can you try to update the PR to the latest main? It seems like we're behind the submodule commit here

[ntdiary]

the patch file has actually already been renamed to 3.16.4, why does 3.16.3 still exist? 😅