[HOLD for payment 2023-12-28] [$500] Distance - Map, amount and distance in the background shows TBD when editing distance

[kbecciv]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 1.4.4.0
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
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team
Slack conversation:

Action Performed:

1. Navigate to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Go to a workspace chat with distance request.
3. Open distance request details page.
4. Click Distance.
5. Click Add stop.
6. Add a new address.

Expected Result:

The map, amount and distance in the background will not show TBD because user is editing the distance without saving.

Actual Result:

The map, amount and distance in the background shows TBD without saving.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?

• Android: Native
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Native
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6293218_1701178732509.20231128_134639.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01c7d894fb538d33ef
• Upwork Job ID: 1729498349642403840
• Last Price Increase: 2023-12-12
• Automatic offers:
• ntdiary | Reviewer | 28055126
• DylanDylann | Contributor | 28055129

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @adelekennedy (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01c7d894fb538d33ef

[melvin-bot]

Bug0 Triage Checklist (Main S/O)

• This "bug" occurs on a supported platform (ensure Platforms in OP are ✅)
• This bug is not a duplicate report (check E/App issues and #expensify-bugs)
  • If it is, comment with a link to the original report, close the issue and add any novel details to the original issue instead
• This bug is reproducible using the reproduction steps in the OP. S/O
  • If the reproduction steps are clear and you're unable to reproduce the bug, check with the reporter and QA first, then close the issue.
  • If the reproduction steps aren't clear and you determine the correct steps, please update the OP.
• This issue is filled out as thoroughly and clearly as possible
  • Pay special attention to the title, results, platforms where the bug occurs, and if the bug happens on staging/production.
• I have reviewed and subscribed to the linked Slack conversation to ensure Slack/Github stay in sync

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @ntdiary (External)

[DylanDylann]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

Distance - Map, amount and distance in the background shows TBD when editing distance

What is the root cause of that problem?

When selecting a new stop waypoint we will set pendingField.waypoint is updated and we only reset it to null if user click save button. We are displaying TBD in the amount field if there is a pending waypoint.

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestView.js

Line 102 in 935608b

const hasPendingWaypoints = lodashGet(transaction, 'pendingFields.waypoints', null);

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

We should update condition here

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestView.js

Line 102 in 935608b

const hasPendingWaypoints = lodashGet(transaction, 'pendingFields.waypoints', null);

like that

    const hasPendingWaypointsAndOffline = lodashGet(transaction, 'pendingFields.waypoints', null) && isOffline;

And using it instead of hasPendingWaypoints in everywhere.

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

I am not sure why we need to set pendingField.waypoint when selecting a new waypoint

App/src/libs/actions/Transaction.ts

Line 61 in 935608b

pendingFields: {

Even though we don't call API in here. Normally, pendingField and pending action only be added in optimisticaData (apply before sending API) and It is re-set in successData and failureData
So I think we should not set pendingField.waypoint when the user updates a new waypoint, we only set the pending field if the user clicks save button

[shubham1206agra]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue

Distance - Map, amount and distance in the background shows TBD when editing distance

What is the root cause of that problem?

This is because we are editing directly on transaction Onyx. And we are using backup in transactionDraft_ collection for saving the last transaction.

Due to changes in transactions directly, the fields are getting TBD due to hasPendingWaypoints becomes true when adding waypoint.

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

We can do the opposite. Use Transaction Draft for editing and then transfer the updated data on transaction collection later.

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[paultsimura]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

When editing a Distance request, the distance and amount fields are set to "TBD" before the actual update happens.

What is the root cause of that problem?

We are not handling the loading state of the distance transaction properly.
On the MoneyRequestView page, we use:

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestView.js

Line 102 in 12eb47f

const hasPendingWaypoints = lodashGet(transaction, 'pendingFields.waypoints', null);

Which equals true when we have modified the waypoints in the drawer, but have not saved them yet.

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

We set the transaction.isLoading when modifying the waypoints of the distance request here:

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

Lines 757 to 766 in cd9cd57

	optimisticData.push({
	onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
	key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION}${transactionID}`,
	value: {
	...updatedTransaction,
	pendingFields,
	isLoading: _.has(transactionChanges, 'waypoints'),
	errorFields: null,
	},
	});

And we handle this state in other places, like here:

App/src/components/DistanceRequest/index.js

Line 84 in 19c8e25

const isLoading = lodashGet(transaction, 'isLoading', false);

First, on MoneyRequestView, we should also replace the hasPendingWaypoints with isLoading along with isOffline, and use it in places where hasPendingWaypoints is currently used:

const isLoading = lodashGet(transaction, 'isLoading', false) && isOffline;

Second, we should also use if (!transaction.isLoading) instead of if (!Object.hasOwn(transaction?.pendingFields ?? {}, 'waypoints')) here, otherwise the map will be replaced with the pending receipt while the waypoints are being added.

App/src/libs/ReceiptUtils.ts

Line 40 in 61c8b11

if (!Object.hasOwn(transaction?.pendingFields ?? {}, 'waypoints')) {

Basically, we will need to modify most of the changes made in PR #30232 using this condition.

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[adelekennedy]

@ntdiary a few proposals to review above!

[ntdiary]

under review

[ntdiary]

For @DylanDylann's proposal, isOffline does not work when editing waypoints offline.

For @shubham1206agra's proposal, the changes made using the draft for editing might be substantial, but the benefits gained are relatively small, as currently we only need to show TBD after clicking save and before the request is complete.

So far, I think the fitting approach is to check the transaction.isLoading field (i.e., @paultsimura's proposal), but there are still some details that need optimization, and if necessary, we may need to refactor the changes in PR #30232 using this condition.

[paultsimura]

we may need to refactor the changes in PR #30232 using this condition

I was initially oriented on the changes of this PR when posting my proposal. Just didn't want to clutter the proposal with all the changes, but yes, we'll need to make changes in all the places where PR #30232 used pending waypoints.

Added this sentence into the proposal now.

[DylanDylann]

@ntdiary What about my alternative solution?

[DylanDylann]

@ntdiary

For @DylanDylann's proposal, isOffline does not work when editing waypoints offline.

I think it is correct because when editing waypoint offline we can't get new route and new distance, it is suitable to display default map and TBD in the amount field

[melvin-bot]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[ntdiary]

@ntdiary What about my alternative solution?

@DylanDylann, I'm also not sure why we need to set pendingField.waypoint. However, isLoading is also consistent with optimistic behavior here.

@ntdiary

For @DylanDylann's proposal, isOffline does not work when editing waypoints offline.

I think it is correct because when editing waypoint offline we can't get new route and new distance, it is suitable to display default map and TBD in the amount field

I was saying that your solution cannot guarantee that users will see TBD only after clicking Save(in offline mode). :)

[paultsimura]

there are still some details that need optimization

@ntdiary I assume this is the reason you didn't approve the proposal yet. Could you please point to them so we could move closer to the C+ approval?

[ntdiary]

there are still some details that need optimization

@ntdiary I assume this is the reason you didn't approve the proposal yet. Could you please point to them so we could move closer to the C+ approval?

Nope, I am also investigating pendingFields.waypoints. 😂

[ntdiary]

The code on the main branch has been changed. Ideally, this issue should have been fixed. However, it seems that the condition was reversed. I left a comment here #28618 (comment).

App/src/libs/actions/Transaction.ts

Lines 60 to 64 in 3d56ca3

	function saveWaypoint(transactionID: string, index: string, waypoint: RecentWaypoint | null, isDraft = false) {
	Onyx.merge(`${isDraft ? ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION : ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION_DRAFT}${transactionID}`, {
	pendingFields: {
	waypoints: isDraft ? CONST.RED_BRICK_ROAD_PENDING_ACTION.UPDATE : CONST.RED_BRICK_ROAD_PENDING_ACTION.ADD,
	},

Ah, sorry, the latest code has a lot of changes. The conclusion above may not be correct. I need to investigate it further. 😅

[melvin-bot]

📣 @ntdiary 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Reviewer role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job

[melvin-bot]

📣 @DylanDylann 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job
Please accept the offer and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[DylanDylann]

@ntdiary #33043
the PR is ready for review. Please help to re-assign to you

[melvin-bot]

Reviewing label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.4.14-6 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix/32123: Remove pending fields when saving waypoints #33043

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-12-28. 🎊

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.

• External issue reporter
• Contributor that fixed the issue
• Contributor+ that helped on the issue and/or PR

For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:

• @ntdiary requires payment automatic offer (Reviewer)
• @DylanDylann requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)

[melvin-bot]

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:

• [@ntdiary] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@ntdiary] 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:
• [@ntdiary] 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:
• [@ntdiary] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@ntdiary] If we decide to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.
• [@adelekennedy] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[melvin-bot]

@ntdiary, @adelekennedy, @hayata-suenaga, @DylanDylann Eep! 4 days overdue now. Issues have feelings too...

[melvin-bot]

@ntdiary, @adelekennedy, @hayata-suenaga, @DylanDylann Eep! 4 days overdue now. Issues have feelings too...

[DylanDylann]

@adelekennedy Could you help to move forward with this issue?
cc @ntdiary

[ntdiary]

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:

• [@ntdiary] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: 26141
• [@ntdiary] 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/26141/files#r1442973530
• [@ntdiary] 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: No need
• [@ntdiary] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug. No need
• [@ntdiary] If we decide to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps to ensure the same bug will not reach production again. No need
• [@adelekennedy] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

I personally feel like regression test might not be very necessary, most of us will use pendingFields correctly, and the error here is unlikely to be repeated. :)

cc @adelekennedy

[adelekennedy]

Back from ooo and picking this up - I agree we can skip the regression test here!

Payouts due:

Contributor: $500 @ntdiary
Contributor+: $500 @DylanDylann

Upwork job is here.