(2/2) Add support for all reportAction types in ChatListItem - use PureReportActionItem in ChatListItem

[wildan-m]

Explanation of Change

Second PR to add support for all reportAction types in ChatListItem, this part replace chatlistItem inner component with pureReportAction

Fixed Issues

$ #51296
PROPOSAL: #51296 (comment)

Tests

Pre-condition: Login to account with various chat types

1. Go to Search option from bottom tab.
2. Click on Chat type from LHP, choose Chats
3. Tap on search item with image, verify the image shown in the modal
4. Tap on search item with attachment, verify the image shown in the modal
5. Ensure the search results feature works the same as staging

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as test

QA Steps

Same as test

• 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 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 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:
  • 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.ts 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.
• I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
• 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

Kapture.2024-12-28.at.11.16.37.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

Kapture.2024-12-28.at.11.20.10.mp4

iOS: Native

Kapture.2024-12-28.at.09.19.43.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

Kapture.2024-12-28.at.09.40.09.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Kapture.2024-12-28.at.09.11.12.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

Kapture.2024-12-28.at.11.11.31.mp4

[wildan-m]

@luacmartins @allgandalf this is draft PR for the second part.
I have some parts to confirm.

Will the logic to show icons the same between reportactionitem and chatlistitem?

PureReportActionItem might render ReportActionItemSingle and use getReportActionActorAccountID, to determine the icons from personalDetails, but SearchReportAction doesn't have ownerAccountID, actorAccountID, etc to fullfill the logic.

will SearchReportAction / SearchReport return required props in the upcoming BE updates? (including its required personalDetails)

[luacmartins]

@wildan-m Search already returns personalDetailsList which should be used. As for the missing reportAction keys, yes, we need to update the BE to return them. I'll work on adding actorAccountID to the chat response now, so that case can be properly rendered to begin with.

[luacmartins]

PR to add actorAccountID is in review

[wildan-m]

@luacmartins @allgandalf There is a new ESLint rule that enforces the use of a default value of '0' or undefined instead of '-1'. I am concerned that this change could potentially cause regressions, especially because there are numerous occurrences in the PureReportActionItem, ReportActionItemSingle and their subcomponents. Should this be addressed in this pull request?

error  Default the number ID to `CONST.DEFAULT_NUMBER_ID` instead. See: https://github.com/Expensify/App/blob/main/contributingGuides/STYLE.md#default-value-for-inexistent-IDs  rulesdir/no-default-id-values

[luacmartins]

@luacmartins @allgandalf There is a new ESLint rule that enforces the use of a default value of '0' or undefined instead of '-1'. I am concerned that this change could potentially cause regressions, especially because there are numerous occurrences in the PureReportActionItem, ReportActionItemSingle and their subcomponents. Should this be addressed in this pull request?

Let's open a separate PR for that and get it merged first, so if there are regressions it's isolated to that one PR and it's easy to revert

[allgandalf]

@wildan-m can you please fix the workflows

[melvin-bot]

@allgandalf 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]

[luacmartins]

Nice, things are looking good when the data is available, although it seems like we're still getting the data from Onyx somehow. I did a quick test tweaking the API to return all reportAction types and we can see that the actions are rendered, but since the linked data, e.g. transactions, parentReport, etc is not yet returned in search, it doesn't display anything until we click into it. This part is expected, but once we click into the action, we open the report and load the linked data and ChatListItem is updated and displays the action. I'm not sure this last part is expected since it means we're still reading data from live Onyx, instead of the snapshot key.

Screen.Recording.2024-12-30.at.1.20.53.PM.mov

[luacmartins]

I can't comment on the line, but ReportPreview in line 736 is still directly connected to Onyx, which means it doesn't show correct report data, e.g.

Screen.Recording.2024-12-31.at.3.21.29.PM.mov

[luacmartins]

Ok, I have a PR to filter out other types of reportActions #54690 so that we can make the backend return data and control the release a bit better. I also have a BE draft PR to return additional data to Search.

[luacmartins]

@wildan-m App PR filtering out other types of actions was merged. Let's update main to reflect that. Meanwhile, I'm still working on the backend PR to send additional data to the client. I expect the PR to be ready today and hopefully deployed next Monday

[luacmartins]

@wildan-m BE PR was merged, it should be deployed on Monday so you can continue testing

[luacmartins]

Oops just realized that we got a bit ahead of ourselves and the BE PR was merged and will likely be deployed before we filter other action types out in the frontend. I just tested locally and things seem OK since all actions have html/text to be displayed we still show something to the user with a correct link to the report/reportAction so I don't think we need to worry about that in the next deploy cycle.

[wildan-m]

@luacmartins In order to show all data, do we need to update the API parameter for the backend change? Is it currently in development, or has it already been deployed to the staging server?

[luacmartins]

@wildan-m the additional data should be sent automatically. The PR was only merged, but not yet deployed. I believe it should be deployed and available some time today.

[allgandalf]

@wildan-m when can this PR be ready for final review ?

[wildan-m]

@allgandalf I need to ensure this bug resolved #54228 (review). I think we need to wait until the BE part deployed #54228 (comment) to make re-testing effort efficient

[luacmartins]

@wildan-m backend PR is deployed. Please re-test!

[wildan-m]

@luacmartins @allgandalf it seems that we will have to ensure that all pureReportAction subcomponents are pure. I will attempt to make these subcomponents pure without having to create a new file like we did for ReportActionItem. Please inform me if you have any better suggestions.

[wildan-m]

@luacmartins @allgandalf when we move up most onxy data from subcomponents to ReportActionItem, a ReportActionItem might contain many onyx data that not actually needed, do you think it will significantly affect performance?

[luacmartins]

@luacmartins @allgandalf it seems that we will have to ensure that all pureReportAction subcomponents are pure. I will attempt to make these subcomponents pure without having to create a new file like we did for ReportActionItem. Please inform me if you have any better suggestions.

Yea, I think that this is true, but it also concerns me because we have no way to enforce that future components added to it are pure and we'll run into regressions.

@luacmartins @allgandalf when we move up most onxy data from subcomponents to ReportActionItem, a ReportActionItem might contain many onyx data that not actually needed, do you think it will significantly affect performance?

Hard to say without measuring it. I think it'll only really impact performance if we trigger more re-renders, which we might since the whole tree might get updated.

Given the two issues above, I wonder if maybe we could update the useOnyx component to prove data based on different strategies, e.g. if we're on Search, it looks for the provided key within snapshot_<>.data, otherwise it connects directly to the key. We might run into similar issues there though, where some custom hooks are connecting to Onyx and don't follow the same strategy principle.

[luacmartins]

Asked for more input here