feature: implement qbo advanced configuration screens

[teneeto]

Details

Implement a new pages called "QBO advanced configuration screens" for the QuickBooks Online (QBO) connection project.

https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/22779249/75043419-9dfa-4910-9dd2-cf53ac5c166a

Fixed Issues

$ 37799 PROPOSAL: issue Description

Tests

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

Offline tests

QA Steps

• [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 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 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.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 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] 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

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

---

https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/22779249/75043419-9dfa-4910-9dd2-cf53ac5c166a

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Desktop

[melvin-bot[bot]]

@deetergp 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]

[shawnborton]

@Expensify/design curious for your thoughts on this one... the toggle row style in this PR looks nice, but I feel like it's not consistent with the toggle rows we use everywhere else where:

• the label weight is regular, not bold
• the hint text goes below the entire row

If we updated to the official styles, we might get something like this:

Thoughts on that?

I even wonder if it makes sense to use less space between label + toggle and the hint text below, like this?

[dannymcclain]

@shawnborton Man the bold text feels SO nice in these, but I think that you're right and we should update them to be the same as all our other toggle rows (and to be fair, they don't look bad with the normal weight label).

And of your two spacing options for the hint text, I think I do prefer the tighter spacing. What values are you using in each of those?

[shawnborton]

Man the bold text feels SO nice in these

Agree, I guess where I'm sold on the Regular weight is that these are often intermingled with push rows, which only use regular weight as well. Places like this for instance, as well as the mocks above (notice two push rows there)

The first mockup is using 8px gap, whereas the second one is using 4px gap. Mock is here in case you wanna tinker.

[dannymcclain]

Yup—I'm totally with you. While the bold is nice on that one screen, regular works better for the component as a whole. And still looks good on the screen we're talking about here too.

I think we should condense the spacing down to 4px! I added some stress-tester options here in Figma (two and three line labels) and I think it holds up fine. Let's squish it!

[shawnborton]

Works for me! I'll update the component directly in our design system file since it's a tiny change.

[shawnborton]

@teneeto are you able to make the adjustments shown below?

[shawnborton]

Each toggle row should look like this, with 4px of space between the label + toggle and the hint text below it:

The label should be our regular font weight as well.

[deetergp]

I kinda feel like we should tap a C+ for a review of this PR. Any objections @shawn @dannymcclain?

[trjExpensify]

Yeah, @s77rt you want it?

[s77rt]

Sure I'd like to review this

[trjExpensify]

Excellent!

[teneeto]

@shawnborton, I'm looking into adjustments now. Thanks

[shawnborton]

Let us know when there are some new screenshots or when we can spin up a test build. Thanks!

[teneeto]

Let us know when there are some new screenshots or when we can spin up a test build. Thanks!

@shawnborton UI-wise, I think we can have a look again. I'll also update screenshots. Thanks

[hayata-suenaga]

Please merge main as I merged this PR

[shawnborton]

Updated screenshots are looking good. Is there any padding below the very last item in the view? Basically this here:

I think we'd want at least 20px of padding at the bottom of the view so the last row isn't perfectly flush with the bottom edge.

[s77rt]

Please tag me once this is ready for another review

[teneeto]

Updated screenshots are looking good. Is there any padding below the very last item in the view? Basically this here:

I think we'd want at least 20px of padding at the bottom of the view so the last row isn't perfectly flush with the bottom edge.

Yes, there was an 8px bottom padding on the wrapper. I have pushed it up to 20px.

[hayata-suenaga]

@s77rt

This is an internal link, but there is conversation going on there to adjust some of the English UI copy, too for the Advaced-setting-related screens.

Please remember to double confirm the UI copy/texts later

[trjExpensify]

Just passed @teneeto the updated English/Spanish translations in our thread. 👍

[teneeto]

@shawnborton @s77rt @hayata-suenaga, can we please check again?

[shawnborton]

@teneeto do we have updated screenshots?

[teneeto]

Let me add another one.

[teneeto]

@teneeto do we have updated screenshots?

updated screenshots

[hayata-suenaga]

there are quite a lot of conflicts 😓 please fix them when you have time 🙇

[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 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.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 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] 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

https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/16493223/96fe590d-83ec-4cd1-9e2d-4ca96157a8f1

MacOS: Desktop

[hayata-suenaga]

have we solved this issue?

[teneeto]

have we solved this issue?

Ayye! just seeing we need to attend to those too, I can add it now

[hayata-suenaga]

hello where are we at in this PR now? are we close to merging? are there any issues that can be addressed in a follow-up PRs?