Enable RequestMoney in Workspace chats

[luacmartins]

Details

Allows users to request money from a Workspace chat.

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/270581

Tests

Pre-requisite: 2 accounts

1. From the admin account, create a workspace + > New workspace
2. Invite the employee account to the workspace, Settings > Workspaces > Manage member > Invite
3. Log into the employee account
4. Find the workspace chat in the LHN
5. Tap + > Request money
6. Verify that you can request money from the workspace
7. Refresh the page and verify that the request is still there
8. Turn off your internet connect
9. Repeat steps 5-6 and verify that the request goes through but it's now greyed out
10. Turn on internet connection
11. Verify that the request is no longer greyed out
12. Refresh the page and verify that nothing changes
13. Repeat steps 3-12, but start the Request money from from the global create (gloating green + button) instead of the chat + button and select the Workspace chat as the participant.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Steps above.

QA Steps

Test steps above

• 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 / Chrome
  • iOS / native
  • iOS / 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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
  • 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 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(themeColors.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 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 author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Web

web.mov

Mobile Web - Chrome

chrome.mov

Mobile Web - Safari

safari.mov

Desktop

desktop.mov

iOS

ios.mov

Android

android.mov

[luacmartins]

I think this is ready for review!

[MelvinBot]

@parasharrajat @danieldoglas One of you needs to 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]

[mountiny]

Code looks good to me, gonna have to test, I htink this is not ready for testing yet @parasharrajat

[danieldoglas]

Code LGTM as well

[luacmartins]

@parasharrajat can you prioritize reviewing this PR today? This is of high value and is blocking other issues in our roadmap pipeline with an external commit of May 17

[s77rt]

@luacmartins

Find the workspace chat in the LHN

I can't find it 😅 Am I missing something here?

[luacmartins]

Have we added your test account part to the policyExpenseChat beta? If not, can you please ask in Slack if someone can add you to it? My flight is about to take off and I'll lose connection

[parasharrajat]

@luacmartins can you please merge main into this? Testing it right now.

[s77rt]

Getting invalid email error message, not sure if it's related to the account being newly added to the beta.

Kooha-2023-05-04-19-31-09.mp4

[melvin-bot]

🎯 @s77rt, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉

An E/App issue has been created to issue payment here: #18666.

[s77rt]

@luacmartins Thanks! I have approved the PR. Let me know if there anything else is needed from my side.

[JmillsExpensify]

Thanks all!

[luacmartins]

@s77rt @Julesssss @mountiny Had to resolve some style conflicts coming from the Prettier change we just introduced. Can I get another approval?

[Julesssss]

LGTM

[Julesssss]

The Auth PR has been merged so i think we're just awaiting deployment?

[luacmartins]

Yea, just waiting deploy which should happen soon!

[s77rt]

@luacmartins Requesting money using admin account shows both the workspace and the members as participants. Seems like a bug.

Kooha-2023-05-10-11-43-10.mp4

[s77rt]

Address bug #18215 (comment)

[mountiny]

Auth deployed

[mountiny]

I think this is an edge case and we can address it in a follow up #18708

[situchan]

This change needs reverted.
Right now app crashes on main because of this line which was added in #18656

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.js

Line 1181 in 1b1e562

originalMessage.participants = [currentUserEmail, ..._.pluck(participants, 'login')];

[Beamanator]

Let's discuss a resolution in slack: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1683719211068359

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.3.13-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Beamanator in version: 1.3.13-5 🚀

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

[aldo-expensify]

The state and the stateNum are not the same, I think they should be the same right?
I also think that state is not really used, maybe we should remove it.

This is also inconsistent here:

copy/paste?

[mountiny]

hmm I dont think they should be same/identical, right? @luacmartins

[luacmartins]

TBH I don't know why we have state and we don't seem to use state for anything in App, so I agree that we can remove it to make it less confusing.