feature: Add loading indicator when ReconnectApp is running

[nkdengineer]

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #46611
PROPOSAL: #46611 (comment)

Tests

1. Login to app
2. Go to offline mode
3. Back to online mode
4. Verify that: loading indicator is displayed

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

1. Login to app
2. Go to offline mode
3. Back to online mode
4. Verify that: loading indicator is displayed

• 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 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 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.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 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.
• 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

android.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

android-mweb.mov

iOS: Native

ios.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios-mweb.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mov

MacOS: Desktop

desktop.mov

[melvin-bot]

@getusha 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]

[getusha]

@nkdengineer what did we change here? what was the issue?

[nkdengineer]

• Using runOnJS to change isVisible within the animation may cause additional re-renders and other unintended effects.
• I updated to remove isVisible and runOnJS and use opacity.value instead of isVisible.

[nkdengineer]

@getusha friendly bump

[getusha]

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 Issues section 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 Tests section
  • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
  • 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 checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • MacOS: Desktop
• 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. 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
  • 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 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 using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
• 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
• 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(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.
• 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 reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screen.Recording.2024-11-25.at.2.28.59.in.the.afternoon.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2024-11-25.at.2.15.33.in.the.afternoon.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2024-11-26.at.10.25.05.at.night.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-11-25.at.2.18.00.in.the.afternoon.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-11-25.at.2.12.46.in.the.afternoon.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2024-11-25.at.2.21.44.in.the.afternoon.mov

[srikarparsi]

Hi @getusha, how is this coming along? Do you think we can get this merged today or tomorrow?

[getusha]

I'll try to wrap this up today 🙇

[getusha]

@nkdengineer
The indicator isn't animated following this step

1. Troubleshoot > Force offline > Clear cache and restart
2. Navigate to Inbox
3. Navigate to search
4. Navigate back to Inbox

Screen.Recording.2024-11-26.at.10.20.12.at.night.mov

[nkdengineer]

@getusha Fixed this bug.

[nkdengineer]

@getusha Friendly bump.

[shawnborton]

Another Q - for the normal border color that's behind the green, is the intention for that to be 2px height too? Or did we want it to just be 1px and the green part is taller? I can't remember where we landed from the mocks.

[shawnborton]

Then at some point, the loading bar disappeared even though it seems like the app is still loading?

[dubielzyk-expensify]

Another Q - for the normal border color that's behind the green, is the intention for that to be 2px height too? Or did we want it to just be 1px and the green part is taller? I can't remember where we landed from the mocks.

My initial thinking had it be 2px tall on the non-green loading bar, but my thinking was that if we grow from the 1px upward, it would be less awkward:

I think in either situation it'll be slightly weird. If we do a 1px border with 2px green we'll get this:

But maybe that's slightly better!? On the main Inbox app bar, the border will disappear anyways.

Keen to know what you think @shawnborton and @dannymcclain

[srikarparsi]

@srikarparsi I pushed the code for these changes. Please help to check again if it has any problem.

The code more or less looks good to me. It looks like we're waiting to decide whether we want the background of the loading bar to be 1px or 2px and we can proceed from there.

[shawnborton]

I think I actually like the 1px background border line version better, this one:

But happy to defer to whatever you and Danny think is best!

[dannymcclain]

I think I prefer the 2px background border? Since that border doesn't normally exist, I feel like it gives the loading bar a nice landing zone / comfy home. Google calendar does something similar and I think it's really nice:

ScreenRecording_12-19-2024.07-17-16_1.MP4

But I do kinda see how the 1px border lines up with the header in main content pane... So I'm a teeny bit torn.

[shawnborton]

Great example. Welp, sounds like we let Judge Jon throw the gavel at this one!

[shawnborton]

In the meantime, @nkdengineer you have some conflicts to resolve.

[dubielzyk-expensify]

@Expensify/design : I'm gonna throw a spanner in the works and suggest an alteration that don't have any weirdness and just add option C, 1px for the whole thing:

I know it's a bit slim, but I struggle to pick between both options that I don't love haha.

[dannymcclain]

I'd be interested to see the 1px version in real life (like maybe in ad hoc builds on desktop and mobile). Just looking at a screenshot it's hard to know if it would be visible enough.

We could also potentially try a version that didn't use a background border and instead only had the 2px green line animating... Not sure how that would look but it's just an idea.

[shawnborton]

Yeah, I say we update this PR quickly to try the 1px version - that could be a good middle ground. Alternatively, I don't mind Danny's suggestion either!

[nkdengineer]

@shawnborton I just updated the loading bar with 1px version.

[github-actions]

🚧 @dannymcclain has triggered a test build. You can view the workflow run here.

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, Desktop, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/android/52272/index.html	❌ FAILED ❌
	The QR code can't be generated, because the iOS build failed
Desktop 💻	Web 🕸️
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/desktop/52272/NewExpensify.dmg	https://52272.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[dannymcclain]

Hmm bummer. iOS is kind of an important one for this 😅

[shawnborton]

Dang yeah... we even merged main recently too, not sure what's going on there.

[shawnborton]

That being said... I don't mind the 1px loader too much. It's definitely super subtle, but that might be a good thing?

Otherwise I would still personally be cool with this version:

[nkdengineer]

Dang yeah... we even merged main recently too, not sure what's going on there.

I saw IOS run build is also failed yesterday in another PR.

[nkdengineer]

@dannymcclain What do you think about this comment?

[dannymcclain]

I think I feel like the 1px loader is just a little too subtle. I'd love to see what it's like without a background border at all. But aside from that, I would generally be ok with the version Shawn said he'd be cool with too.

[shawnborton]

@nkdengineer thoughts on Danny's comment above? cc @dubielzyk-expensify too!

[nkdengineer]

checking this now.

[dubielzyk-expensify]

I can go either way. I agree that 1px is subtle. The 2px without the background is probably a safer bet then even with it's weirdness.

[nkdengineer]

I think 1px is fine. And in Slack I also see the loading is displayed with the border so I think it's not a problem.

I'd love to see what it's like without a background border at all

@dannymcclain Here is what you want to see, right?

Screen.Recording.2025-01-06.at.14.31.02.mov

[dannymcclain]

Yeah kinda! But the chat header always has a border, so this would be more for the LHN, like this:

For the chat/report header, I think it would be fine to have 2px loader sit "on top" of the existing border (but without any shifting!):

And in Slack I also see the loading is displayed with the border so I think it's not a problem.

Any chance you could grab a recording of this behavior?