[Violations] Update tagOutOfPolicy and taxOutOfPolicy

[neonbhai]

Details

We update the violation messages for tagOutOfPolicy and taxOutOfPolicy

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/34539 PROPOSAL: https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/34539#issuecomment-1892817935

Tests

Prerequisite:

1. Create a collect policy in OldDot
2. Execute the following JS snippet in the OldDot policy to enable workspace chats creation:

   if (Url.getCurrentPageName()!="policy" ){ alert('Only run this snippet from a policy editor!'); } else { var p = Policy.getCurrent(); p.policy.isPolicyExpenseChatEnabled = "true"; p.save().done(function(){$.jGrowl('Workspace chat creation enabled!')}); }
   

3. Add an employee to the policy
4. Enable Tags and add a custom Tag.

For Tag Out Of Policy:

1. Log in to the employee's account
2. Tap on the green plus button (FAB)
3. Select Request money
4. Select any currency and amount
5. Click next
6. Choose the WS room
7. Click on "Show more"
8. Choose the custom tag in the Tag section
9. Complete the IOU
10. Login admin account on OldDot (expensify.com)
11. Navigate to the Collect group policy settings
12. In the Tag tab, disable the employee's selected tag from step 10
13. In the employee's account in ND, open the IOU details

For Tax Out Of Policy:

We cannot test the taxOutOfPolicy violation as we do not yet render it in MoneyRequestView.

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

Offline tests

Same as Tests step.

QA Steps

Same as Tests step.

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 the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
  • [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 verified the translation was requested/reviewed 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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
  • [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.js 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 form input styles:
  • [x] I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • [x] I added Design label 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] 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: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

[melvin-bot[bot]]

@s77rt 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]

[cead22]

Please update tests to include both cases: the single level tags, and the multi level tags. To setup multi level tags you can follow these instructions https://community.expensify.com/discussion/5756/how-to-set-up-and-manage-multi-level-tagging?utm_source=community-search&utm_medium=organic-search&utm_term=independent+tag, and use this file multitags.csv

That file will give the tag lists a name, which should produce violations like "Department no longer valid"

Also note that we're currently not sending the data array ['tagName' => $tagCollection->getName()] from the back end. I'm fixing that now, so we might need to hold this PR until that change is on staging and we can test

[s77rt]

Code looks good but I'm unable to test as I'm not getting any violations errors. I asked for help on Slack

[s77rt]

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 the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
  • [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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
  • [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.js 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 form input styles:
  • [X] I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • [X] I added Design label 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] 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

[s77rt]

@neonbhai Please tag me once the PR is updated (added new testing steps and missing screenshots, complete the checklist)

[s77rt]

@neonbhai Any updates here?

[cead22]

Bump @neonbhai! I also pinged you on #expensify-open-source

[neonbhai]

Hi, sorry for delay, I have updated the PR!



Noting a few things:

• For multitags The app does not show all levels of tag show up. This is what I'm getting is currently

  Video

  https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/64629613/83bdd398-5dac-4d89-a400-815719f28f3e

  Am I missing something? 🤔

• The spanish translations are missing checks if params were passed so they show up as undefined

  

  Proposing to translate according to these keys

  For Tag: 🇺🇸

  CustomTagName no longer valid
  Tag no longer valid
  

  🇪🇸

  La etiqueta CustomTagName ya no es válida
  La etiqueta ya no es válida
  

  For Tax: 🇺🇸

  CustomTaxName no longer valid
  Tax no longer valid
  

  🇪🇸

  CustomTaxName ya no es válido
  El impuesto ya no es válido.
  

  cc: @cead22

• Looks like backend still doesn't send violations with tagName

  Video

  https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/64629613/41e6fd58-c35f-49b5-919c-6e3f8384b969

  Was the backend PR supposed to fix this 🤔

[cead22]

• Am I missing something? 🤔

No, it's just that multiple tags isn't currently supported in new dot, so what you're seeing is what's expected. We also have to update some API commands so when you update a request, violations clear automatically (which is something I'm working on)

• Looks like backend still doesn't send violations with tagName

I think I have an issue for this as well -- but I'll look into it, but let's not block this PR on that

[s77rt]

@neonbhai Can you raise the translation question in Slack?

[cead22]

The translations are good, let's not block on this

[s77rt]

@neonbhai Please apply the same fix for the Spanish translation and we should be good to merge

[neonbhai]

@cead22 looks like the backend was updated to show Tag instead of undefined for tagOutOfPolicy.

So currently it shows as:

Is this good?

[cead22]

Is this good?

Depends, can you share the policy setup, to see if it has multiple levels of tags?

[neonbhai]

Here's the policy setup:

It does not have multiple levels of tag.

Video

The Policy ID is `484377E4416A2AFE` if that's helpful

https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/64629613/7f2d49e1-db79-4e31-8f0a-c40a44ec6566

For Multiple Tags

The violations are now shown as Missing tag

https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/64629613/419c60e9-6c98-4369-981a-27f95777e484

This is the someTagLevelsRequired violation https://github.com/Expensify/App/blob/9f37d3e2c1264420773c886ae6171748e5d512b8/src/languages/en.ts#L2168

[cead22]

Yeah that looks good, and I submitted a back end fix so when the tagName is Tag we don't send it. Is there anything else that looks like it's not working as expected, or does everything work fine now?

[neonbhai]

Is there anything else that looks like it's not working as expected, or does everything work fine now?

Everything is good now! @cead22

cc: @s77rt for review!

[s77rt]

@neonbhai Please clarify the expected results in the testing steps

[neonbhai]

Tests Updated! @s77rt

[s77rt]

@neonbhai In step 12 you are referring to the wrong step (should be 8 not 10)

[neonbhai]

ah right, fixed!

[s77rt]

16. Verify the Tag violation can be seen as: La etiqueta ya no es válida

I don't think that's the case yet, still getting La etiqueta Tag ya no es válida Looks like the BE change are not live yet. If you are getting same thing just omit that test step

[neonbhai]

Right, BE change doesn't seem to be live yet. Updated tests!

[luacmartins]

@cead22 all yours!

[OSBotify]

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/cead22 in version: 1.4.40-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.4.40-5 🚀

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