[Disputes] Introduce a loading state to the “Challenge dispute” (new evidence) flow #11037
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Test the buildOption 1. Jetpack Beta
Option 2. Jurassic Ninja - available for logged-in A12s🚀 Launch a JN site with this branch 🚀 ℹ️ Install this Tampermonkey script to get more options. Build info:
Note: the build is updated when a new commit is pushed to this PR. |
|
Size Change: +288 B (0%) Total Size: 871 kB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
|
Closing since this change is needed to stabilize flaky tests in #11036 |
This reverts commit 9370ddc.
|
Re-opening, see comment |
mgascam
changed the title
mgascam
changed the title
6 tasks
rtio
reviewed
Sep 5, 2025
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I tested the changes and they seem to work fine, but I couldn’t actually reproduce the bad behavior in develop. From your comments, it looks like this only happens in E2E tests when d?.evidence isn’t fully loaded yet. Adding the extra complexity to handle that across all fields feels like a heavy workaround. A cleaner alternative might be to show a loading state until the dispute is fully loaded. Thoughts?
Thanks for the review @rtio, I’ll give the loading state approach a try. |
mgascam
force-pushed
the
dev/woopmnt-5249-disputes-ui
branch
from
d3c1eed to
6c08612
Compare
mgascam
force-pushed
the
dev/woopmnt-5249-disputes-ui
branch
from
6c08612 to
4c350a0
Compare
mgascam
changed the title
|
Hi @rtio, I added the loading state as you suggested in this comment, and it’s ready for review. @lucyneb, it would be great to get your input as well since you were involved in the redesign of the disputes flow. For context: I added a loading state (screen recording attached in the description) to address an issue that surfaced during E2E runs. The tests run so fast that the form state can be unexpected. This wasn’t affecting “real” users, but it’s something we needed to address. In my view, the loading state not only fixes the issue but also improves the UX. Curious to hear your thoughts. Thanks 🙏 |
rtio
approved these changes
Sep 8, 2025
|
Hi @htdat, I saw the pr: needs author reply label was added. I might be overlooking something, but I don’t see any pending feedback. Could you point me to what needs my attention? |
|
@mgascam - I thought that you're waiting for feedback from Design :) Feel free to merge, I do not have any further comment. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #WOOPMNT-5307
Changes proposed in this Pull Request
This PR introduces a loading state that helps to fix a race condition in the disputes E2E tests. In the "Save for later" flow, the description is changed from "Beanie" to "my product description" and saved. However, when the dispute is revisited later, the form incorrectly shows the old value ("Beanie") instead of the updated one. Run logs
Introducing the initial loading state removes the UI race that caused flakiness and also improves the perceived performance and UX flow.
Here's a screen recording of the new spinner in action:
Screen.Recording.2025-09-08.at.17.15.49.mov
Testing instructions
Manual tests of the flow should work as expected:
npm run changelogto add a changelog file, choosepatchto leave it empty if the change is not significant. You can add multiple changelog files in one PR by running this command a few times.Post merge