Closed kavimuru closed 1 year ago
Triggered auto assignment to @strepanier03 (Bug
), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details.
Platforms
in OP are β
)I am testing this and the mentions as well as other clickable links, like embedded URLs are all the point, not the I beam.
I believe it should be the point because it's clickable whereas the I beam indicates text and typing.
@kavimuru - Can you weigh in here. I'm not sure about moving this one forward.
@strepanier03 Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!
@dhanashree-sawant - I have question about your repro steps. In step 4 you say "Select the mention message and observe that cursor remains pointer while selecting and does not change to I beam".
By "select" do you mean open up the sent message to editing and then clicking on the mention?
The reason I ask is because the pointer makes sense to me because the mention is clickable, just like other links.
If I hyperlink a URL, it should be a pointer because it's clickable, same with the mention.
Can you help me understand why it should be an I beam if it's clickable?
Hi @strepanier03, if you see email, URL, they are all clickable but when we select by dragging over them, cursor changes to I beam, if we want to keep the cursor as pointer while drag and select, we should do that too on email and URL to maintain consistency.
Aaah, I think I didn't understand that "select" meant to drag over the message, not click (select) on them. I'll go through it again and update the OP comment with the clarification.
Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~017477dd353ae7b577
Current assignee @strepanier03 is eligible for the External assigner, not assigning anyone new.
Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @eVoloshchak (External
)
Triggered auto assignment to @joelbettner (External
), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.
Okay, I updated repro steps and confirmed following them repros the behavior for me.
I agree we should be consistent and highlighting a message should be I beam and not pointer.
App keeps the cursor as pointer and does not change to I beam while selecting mentions part in message.
In web we only have the behavior of "cursor is different when text is being selected" for text inside <a>
tag, with href
attribute. That's why we can see the correct behavior for links, emails because they are in <a>
tag, with href
. The same can be observed for other texts in <a>
, for example the text links in login page.
So the problem here is we're not using <a>
for the mention-user
comment type, but we're expecting it to have the behavior of <a>
tag. It should indeed be in <a>
tag since it's essentially a link to the user's profile details (Slack also does it too).
To fix this we simply need to make the Text
here a TextLink
, and add a proper href
to it (the place in our site where we lead the user after they click the mention)
https://github.com/Expensify/App/blob/5ff32c3d8cec682ab25107ce5db1319c7d89f51c/src/components/HTMLEngineProvider/HTMLRenderers/MentionUserRenderer.js#L40
This is consistent with the @mention-user
feature in Slack too.
Note: we don't need this for @here
because @here
currently doesn't link to anything and doesn't have the cursor: pointer
NA
@eVoloshchak @strepanier03 @joelbettner this issue was created 2 weeks ago. Are we close to approving a proposal? If not, what's blocking us from getting this issue assigned? Don't hesitate to create a thread in #expensify-open-source to align faster in real time. Thanks!
Little bump on the proposal @eVoloshchak, thank you π
@tienifr's proposal looks good to me!
Btw, does that also mean that long pressing on a mention should bring up the Copy to clipboard
context menu?
πππ C+ reviewed! cc: @joelbettner
@eVoloshchak @tienifr that proposal looks good. Just for clarification, @tienifr, the @here
mentions do not have the problem and automatically highlight with an I-beam because they are not links...correct?
@joelbettner That's correct!
π£ It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? πΈ
@eVoloshchak Yes, it shows the context menu with Copy to clipboard
(text not url) option. I've tested the changes on mWeb and Android and the behaviors remain the same as before:
Since the mention is technically not a link
, I think this is the expected behavior. Fixing this bug shouldn't change the current behavior for long press.
For the Android: Show nothing
, I think it might be a bug, but it exists now in staging and not introduced by the change so if it's a bug we might want to report it separately.
@joelbettner - Are you good with the proposal and hiring @tienifr based on their reply to your question?
@eVoloshchak @strepanier03 @joelbettner this issue is now 3 weeks old. There is one more week left before this issue breaks WAQ and will need to go internal. What needs to happen to get a PR in review this week? Please create a thread in #expensify-open-source to discuss. Thanks!
@joelbettner - Are you good with the proposal and hiring @tienifr based on their reply to your question?
Yes I am.
π£ @tienifr You have been assigned to this job by @joelbettner! Please apply to this job in Upwork and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review π§βπ» Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing π
PR ready for review https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/20447!
Based on my calculations, the pull request did not get merged within 3 working days of assignment. Please, check out my computations here:
On to the next one π
@joelbettner I think Melvin's calculation here is incorrect. When subtracting the dates it's clearly under 3 days (it's around 2 days 3 hours)
β οΈ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here
If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.
If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.
If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.
@tienifr - I agree, the math seemed wrong there. I hid that math so it doesn't get taken into account when assessing payment.
Triggered auto assignment to @JmillsExpensify (Bug
), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details.
Platforms
in OP are β
)@JmillsExpensify - I am heading out for sabbatical this evening and need to reassign this to be finished up.
There was an automated post for the speed bonus that I hid because the math in it was wrong. But since then there has been a regression so the speed bonus is a moot point now.
The PR is deployed to staging and the C+ is working on fixing the regression so no action is needed right now from you but will be needed in the coming days.
Thank you for wrapping this up!
Based on my calculations, the pull request did not get merged within 3 working days of assignment. Please, check out my computations here:
On to the next one π
Based on my calculations, the pull request did not get merged within 3 working days of assignment. Please, check out my computations here:
On to the next one π
Reviewing
label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".
The solution for this issue has been :rocket: deployed to production :rocket: in version 1.3.28-5 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period :calendar:. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:
If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-06-23. :confetti_ball:
After the hold period is over and BZ checklist items are completed, please complete any of the applicable payments for this issue, and check them off once done.
As a reminder, here are the bonuses/penalties that should be applied for any External issue:
BugZero Checklist: The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed:
The solution for this issue has been :rocket: deployed to production :rocket: in version 1.3.29-11 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period :calendar:. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:
If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-06-28. :confetti_ball:
After the hold period is over and BZ checklist items are completed, please complete any of the applicable payments for this issue, and check them off once done.
As a reminder, here are the bonuses/penalties that should be applied for any External issue:
BugZero Checklist: The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed:
@JmillsExpensify, @eVoloshchak, @joelbettner, @tienifr Eep! 4 days overdue now. Issues have feelings too...
@eVoloshchak Do you mind getting us kicked off with the BZ checklist above ahead of kicking off payouts tomorrow?
In the meantime, let's get the payouts catalogued.
Upwork job is here. Can everyone send along proposals and I'll get the contract/payout covered.
Hi @JmillsExpensify, if possible, can you send me invite to the job?
The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/18495
The offending PR has been commented on, pointing out the bug it caused and why, so the author and reviewers can learn from the mistake. Link to comment: https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/18495/files#r1246716190
A discussion in #expensify-bugs has been started about whether any other steps should be taken (e.g. updating the PR review checklist) in order to catch this type of bug sooner. Link to discussion: this is simply a visual bug, I don't think there are additional steps we could take
Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug. Is it easy to test for this bug? Yes Is the bug related to an important user flow? No Is it an impactful bug? No Bug has an extremely low impact, so I don't think a regression test is necessary here
Contributor+: @eVoloshchak $1,000
@JmillsExpensify, this has caused two regressions, so my pay should be reduced to 25%. Not sure what the rules concerning this for Contributors are
Upwork job is here. Can everyone send along proposals and I'll get the contract/payout covered.
Could you hold my payment till tomorrow, please? I'll try to request the payment using NewDot instead of Upwork, need some additional setting up to do
Could you hold my payment till tomorrow, please? I'll try to request the payment using NewDot instead of Upwork, need some additional setting up to do
Ok that'd be great. Will hold.
@JmillsExpensify, this has caused two regressions, so my pay should be reduced to 25%. Not sure what the rules concerning this for Contributors are
At the moment, the deduction applies to C+.
Bug has an extremely low impact, so I don't think a regression test is necessary here
I also agree with this.
Offers sent to contributor and issue reporter.
Thanks I have accepted the offer.
If you havenβt already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!
Action Performed:
Expected Result:
App should change the cursor to I beam while highlighting the mentions part in message as it normally does for email, links etc
Actual Result:
App keeps the cursor as pointer and does not change to I beam while selecting mentions part in message
Workaround:
Can the user still use Expensify without this being fixed? Have you informed them of the workaround?
Platforms:
Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?
Version Number: 1.3.16-5 Reproducible in staging?: y Reproducible in production?: y If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856 Notes/Photos/Videos: Any additional supporting documentation
https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/43996225/6d62ab42-d41c-402c-bdb2-7c7dc0898873
https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/43996225/7113a7bb-9caa-4aa3-8837-78aa5d0affa7
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL: Issue reported by: @dhanashree-sawant Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1684312696564409
View all open jobs on GitHub
Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit