Skip to content

LHN Still Too Wide on Desktop After LHB Addition – Propose Reducing Width to 320px #61678

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Conversation

WojtekBoman
Copy link
Contributor

Explanation of Change

This PR reduces the sidebar width to 300px.

Fixed Issues

$ #61614
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console
  1. Verify if the sidebar width is equal to 300px.

Offline tests

  1. Verify if the sidebar width is equal to 300px.

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console
  1. Verify if the sidebar width is equal to 300px.

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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
  • 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

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screenshot 2025-05-08 at 12 19 05
Screenshot 2025-05-08 at 12 18 49

MacOS: Desktop Screenshot 2025-05-08 at 12 19 44 Screenshot 2025-05-08 at 12 19 33

@WojtekBoman WojtekBoman changed the title Reduce sidebar size to 300px LHN Still Too Wide on Desktop After LHB Addition – Propose Reducing Width to 300px May 8, 2025
@WojtekBoman WojtekBoman marked this pull request as ready for review May 8, 2025 10:47
@WojtekBoman WojtekBoman requested review from a team as code owners May 8, 2025 10:47
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from dukenv0307 and removed request for a team May 8, 2025 10:47
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented May 8, 2025

@dukenv0307 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]

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented May 8, 2025

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

This comment has been minimized.

@shawnborton
Copy link
Contributor

cc @Expensify/design @JmillsExpensify @coleaeason let's take this test build above for a spin

It feels a little cramped on Inbox... but the other pages feel great.

@dannymcclain
Copy link
Contributor

I think it might feel a little tight to me.

Inbox definitely, but I'm also thinking about these places where your name, a workspace name, or your expense chat will get truncated pretty quickly.

CleanShot 2025-05-08 at 08 14 27@2x

CleanShot 2025-05-08 at 08 12 15@2x

Maybe we could try 320px? Or if we wanted to go big, we could perhaps even consider making some layout adjustments to these LHNs to play more nicely with a reduced width. I'm not against sending it as is, but we may want to do some exploring.

@shawnborton
Copy link
Contributor

Those are all fair comments. I say we try 320px as that could be a good balance for now?

@WojtekBoman mind pushing a quick commit and we'll fire up a new test build?

@Kicu
Copy link
Member

Kicu commented May 8, 2025

@shawnborton I changed value to 320px, you can fire the build now

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented May 8, 2025

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

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented May 8, 2025

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

Android 🤖 iOS 🍎
Android 🤖🔄 iOS 🍎🔄
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/android/61678-hybrid/index.html https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/ios/61678-hybrid/index.html
Android iOS
Desktop 💻 Web 🕸️
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/desktop/61678/NewExpensify.dmg https://61678.pr-testing.expensify.com
Desktop Web

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

@shawnborton
Copy link
Contributor

Feels pretty good? Not as much gains 💪 as before, but still some gains!

@dannymcclain
Copy link
Contributor

Not as much gains 💪 as before, but still some gains!

True. I think it feels pretty good—but would you rather go with the slimmer one?

@shawnborton
Copy link
Contributor

No strong feelings really, I am down for 320px to start and we can keep reducing from there if we want to? Let's also see what @dubielzyk-expensify thinks (you might need to manually adjust the width in your browser at this point, I think historical build links would all be updated to the latest code)

@dubielzyk-expensify
Copy link
Contributor

320px feels pretty great. I recon we go there next, then like you suggested we can go down to 300 later. I do kinda think for us to go on or below 300px we need to start looking into other padding and font sizings.

@shawnborton
Copy link
Contributor

Okay cool - I say we send it as-is now at 320px and go from there. @dukenv0307 please go forward with final testing and review, thanks!

@dannymcclain
Copy link
Contributor

I do kinda think for us to go on or below 300px we need to start looking into other padding and font sizings.

Agree. I've start some #top-secret #wildly-experimental explorations, but we can keep exploring this another time. Let's send it with 320 for now!

@dukenv0307
Copy link
Contributor

on it now

@dukenv0307
Copy link
Contributor

dukenv0307 commented May 9, 2025

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 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
    • 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 Screenshot 2025-05-10 at 02 16 51
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2025-05-10.at.01.16.45.mov
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-05-10.at.01.16.37.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari Screenshot 2025-05-10 at 02 14 36
MacOS: Desktop Screenshot 2025-05-10 at 02 20 15

@dukenv0307
Copy link
Contributor

I'm facing some issues while building native app. But I think we're good to merge since it's quite simple

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from mountiny May 9, 2025 19:22
@mountiny mountiny changed the title LHN Still Too Wide on Desktop After LHB Addition – Propose Reducing Width to 300px LHN Still Too Wide on Desktop After LHB Addition – Propose Reducing Width to 320px May 9, 2025
@mountiny mountiny merged commit e59198b into Expensify:main May 9, 2025
18 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented May 9, 2025

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.1.45-0 🚀

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

Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.1.45-0 🚀

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

@IuliiaHerets
Copy link

@WojtekBoman @mountiny @dukenv0307 LHN width is 319 px at fact, not 320 px
Screen Shot 2025-05-14 at 1 18 38 PM
Can we pass a PR?

@shawnborton
Copy link
Contributor

That's probably fine because we have a 1px border to account for as well. I say it should pass.

Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/francoisl in version: 9.1.45-21 🚀

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants