[Payment due @parasharrajat] Add reasonCodes for shipping cards - #97157
Conversation
…-ship-and-replace-card
…-ship-and-replace-card
…-ship-and-replace-card
chuckdries
changed the title
Codecov Report✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!
|
|
I'll take this out of draft once the backend is ready |
chuckdries
changed the title
chuckdries
changed the title
|
PR is up to date now, but still waiting on web-e deploy |
chuckdries
changed the title
|
@parasharrajat 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] |
|
@shubham1206agra 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] |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: f8033de116
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
| title={translate('cardPage.validateCardTitle')} | ||
| descriptionPrimary={translate('cardPage.enterSecurityCode', primaryLogin ?? '')} | ||
| sendValidateCode={() => requestValidateCodeAction()} | ||
| sendValidateCode={() => requestValidateCodeAction({reasonCode: COMMON_CONST.VALIDATE_CODE_REASONS.REPLACE_CARD, reasonCardID: Number(cardID)})} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When a user reaches this screen within the 30-second resend window after any other validate-code flow, ValidateCodeActionContent skips sendValidateCode based only on VALIDATE_ACTION_CODE.lastValidateCodeRequestedAt (src/components/ValidateCodeActionModal/ValidateCodeActionContent.tsx:49-53). With this PR the replacement code must be bound to REPLACE_CARD and this card ID, so the skipped call means no replacement-specific code is requested; the UI still treats the previous generic/other-purpose code as sent, and submitting it will be rejected until the user waits and manually resends. Please make the recent-code guard reason/card-aware or force a fresh request for these reason-specific card flows.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, it's a valid flaw. Arguably out of scope for this PR but I think I have an idea of how to solve it relatively cleanly. Let me try
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually, kind of a large change. Let's defer to a follow up
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes. IMO, this is not deemed necessary as the user is using the old code from some other flow.
|
Testing... |
joekaufmanexpensify
left a comment
joekaufmanexpensify
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good for product.
parasharrajat
left a comment
parasharrajat
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewer Checklist
- I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
- I verified the correct issue is linked in the
### Fixed Issuessection above - I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
- I verified the steps for local testing are in the
Testssection - I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the
QA stepssection - 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)
- 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 verified the steps for local testing are in the
- I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
- I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
- I verified that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
- I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android: HybridApp
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: HybridApp
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
- 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
- I verified proper code patterns were followed (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.
toggleReportand notonIconClick). - 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 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 that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e.
- If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
- I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
- 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 usingAvatarhave been tested & I retested again) - 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
thisproperly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. foronClick={this.submit}the methodthis.submitshould be bound tothisin the constructor) - Any internal methods bound to
thisare necessary to be bound (i.e. avoidthis.submit = this.submit.bind(this);ifthis.submitis never passed to a component event handler likeonClick) - 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(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
Avataris modified, I verified thatAvataris 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
Designlabel and/or tagged@Expensify/designso the design team can review the changes.
- For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this flow.
- If the
mainbranch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to theTeststeps. - I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.
15.08.2026_16.04.34_REC.mp4
🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed
melvin-bot
Bot
changed the title
|
🎯 @parasharrajat, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉 A payment issue will be created for your review once this PR is deployed to production. If payment is not needed (e.g., regression PR review fix etc), react with 👎 to this comment to prevent the payment issue from being created. |
|
@chuckdries I tried restarting GH actions but it's still failing with: |
3ed96da
|
🚧 pecanoro has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here. |
|
✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release. |
|
🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
|
|
🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/pecanoro in version: 9.4.56-0 🚀
|
|
🤖 No help site changes required. I reviewed the changes in this PR against the help articles under Why: This is an internal security enhancement. It introduces a The only user-visible effect is the wording inside the backend-generated security-code email (e.g. "Someone is trying to Ship your new Expensify card"). That email copy is generated server-side and isn't part of the public help site. The in-app flows a member follows are unchanged:
The relevant help articles (How to Request a New Expensify Card and Cardholder Settings and Features) already describe the security-code confirmation step generically ("confirm with a security code sent to their email") and don't document the internal @chuckdries — since no docs changes were needed, there's no linked help site PR to review. If you believe any card-related help article should be updated as a result of this change, let me know which behavior and I'll draft it. |
|
🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Beamanator in version: 9.4.56-3 🚀
Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry): |
|
🤖 Payment issue created: #99019 |
7 participants
Explanation of Change
The big picture is we're introducing reasonCode, a parameter you pass to ResendValidateCode that binds that specific validateCode to only be used for the intended purpose. This PR implements
SHIP_CARD,REPLACE_CARDandREPORT_CARD_FRAUD.Fixed Issues
$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/623748
PROPOSAL:
Tests
Ship card
Replace physical card
Report virtual card fraud
Offline tests
N/A
QA Steps
Same as tests
PR Author Checklist
### Fixed Issuessection aboveTestssectionOffline stepssectionQA stepssectionAvatar, I verified the components usingAvatarare working as expected)StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))npm run compress-svg)Avataris modified, I verified thatAvataris working as expected in all cases)Designlabel and/or tagged@Expensify/designso the design team can review the changes.mainbranch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to theTeststeps.Screenshots/Videos
Ship card
ship.physical.card.works.mp4
Replace physical card
replace.physical.card.works.mp4
Report virtual card fraud
report.virtual.card.fraud.works.mp4