-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3k
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
[HOLD for payment 2024-03-07] [LOW] [P2P] [$500] IOU-Add a contact to request money and tap back button, contact added to split. #32912
Comments
Triggered auto assignment to @conorpendergrast ( |
Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01ce8011451da4f3dc |
Bug0 Triage Checklist (Main S/O)
|
Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @parasharrajat ( |
👋 Friendly reminder that deploy blockers are time-sensitive ⏱ issues! Check out the open `StagingDeployCash` deploy checklist to see the list of PRs included in this release, then work quickly to do one of the following:
|
Triggered auto assignment to @youssef-lr ( |
We are not clearing participants list when coming back /**
* @param {String} transactionID
* @param {Object[]} participants
*/
function setMoneyRequestParticipants_temporaryForRefactor(transactionID, participants) {
Onyx.merge(`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION_DRAFT}${transactionID}`, {participants});
} There are some problems with the current logic of participants page |
Please prioritise this once you finish the C+ reviews, thank you! |
ProposalPlease re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.When add a contact to request money and tap back button, contact added to split. What is the root cause of that problem?We're not clearing the participants list when coming back and the request is a request (not a split). What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?Clearing the participants list when coming back and the request is a request (not a split). In the split case we should keep the participants because the user expects to unselect or select more participants. What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)There's also a bug where when clicking "Split" in the participants list when 1 participant is already selected for the split, it only adds that participant to the Split (we need to add the current user as well). We can fix that by appending the participants properly |
@dukenv0307 Do you have a solution right now? |
ProposalPlease re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.Pressing a participant and then go back will show the participant as selected and there is a Add to split button. What is the root cause of that problem?This issue was previously fixed in #28751 by adding When we press a participant, it will be added to the transaction App/src/components/OptionsSelector/BaseOptionsSelector.js Lines 460 to 461 in 6ea38a6
What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?Add back some of the solutions from #28751. Based on the discussion, we want to use a route-based solution. To achieve that, every time we add a participant as the split participant, update the If the Also, if we press "Add to split" button, then we should pass Details
Pass false here (not a split) App/src/pages/iou/request/MoneyTemporaryForRefactorRequestParticipantsSelector.js Lines 165 to 171 in 75041d0
Pass App/src/pages/iou/request/MoneyTemporaryForRefactorRequestParticipantsSelector.js Line 211 in 75041d0
b. for App/src/pages/iou/request/MoneyTemporaryForRefactorRequestParticipantsSelector.js Line 172 in 69ef5e0
Pass App/src/pages/iou/request/MoneyTemporaryForRefactorRequestParticipantsSelector.js Line 279 in 69ef5e0
App/src/pages/iou/request/MoneyTemporaryForRefactorRequestParticipantsSelector.js Line 318 in 69ef5e0
b. App/src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepParticipants.js Lines 72 to 75 in 69ef5e0
c. Update the headerTitle to show Split if it's a split request. This is the same logic as in
|
Can you post the video @bernhardoj? |
@shubham1206agra yes, I can work on this right now |
Added the video |
@shubham1206agra I think the proposal by @bernhardoj is basically what I proposed at a high level (but with added code changes) |
Meanwhile I can make a head start on this to make sure it's merged quickly 👍 |
📣 @akinwale 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app! Offer link |
@akinwale has volunteered to take over here 🙇 |
@youssef-lr Are we ready to merge here? |
Reviewing now! |
Code LGTM, but I found a bug. |
If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results. If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here. If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future. Edit: not a regression |
If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results. If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here. If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future. |
|
The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.4.45-6 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue: If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-03-07. 🎊 For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:
|
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:
|
Reminder set to pay |
@MitchExpensify Can you please ensure that @situchan gets paid for a C+ review of #32948 |
Payment summary: C+: $500 @bernhardoj (Upwork) Paid and contracts ended |
I mistook my payment to Bernhard for a payment to Situ - Very sorry for that slip up @situchan. To correct it I have sent you an offer here https://www.upwork.com/nx/wm/offer/101471671 |
Accepted thanks |
Paid and contract ended, thanks! |
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: 1.4.11
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: N
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:
Expected Result:
When add a contact to request money and tap back button, contact must not be added to split.
Actual Result:
When add a contact to request money and tap back button, contact added to split.
Workaround:
Unknown
Platforms:
Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?
Screenshots/Videos
Bug6309952_1702352257190.add_to_split.mp4
View all open jobs on GitHub
Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: