[HOLD for payment 2024-06-06] [$250] IOU - "Members" appears in IOU details page and then disappears after a few seconds

[m-natarajan]

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: 1.4.71-0
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: No
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. Login as user A to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Submit two expenses to B
3. Press IOU preview to open transaction page
4. Select any IOU request
5. Press header to open the details page

Expected Result:

Only settings is seen in details page of IOU request.

Actual Result:

"Members" is seen briefly and then disappears

Workaround:

Can the user still use Expensify without this being fixed? Have you informed them of the workaround?

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

Bug6474284_1715117859768.1715101165176_41639_iOS_.mp4

Bug6474284_1715117859768.41639_Web_.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~012a67c3a384fec2d0
• Upwork Job ID: 1788211386365521920
• Last Price Increase: 2024-05-08
• Automatic offers:
• Pujan92 | Reviewer | 0
• nkdengineer | Contributor | 0

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @trjExpensify

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @rlinoz (DeployBlockerCash), see https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/9980/ for more details.

[melvin-bot]

👋 Friendly reminder that deploy blockers are time-sensitive ⏱ issues! Check out the open Staging deploy checklist to see the list of PRs included in this release, then work quickly on the following:

1. If you find which PR caused the issue/bug, you can reassign it to the person responsible for it.
   • If the author is OOO or won’t get online before the daily deploy is due, you are responsible for finding the best fix/path forward. Don’t hesitate to ask for help!
2. Try to reproduce the issue, if the bug is on production, remove the DeployBlocker label but stay assigned to fix it (or find out which PR broke it to get help from the author).
   • You can adjust the urgency of the issue to better represent the gravity of the bug.
   • If the issue is super low priority, feel free to un-assign yourself.
   • Be careful with PHP warnings, sometimes it is more complex than just adding a null coalescing operator as they might be uncovering some bigger bug.
   • If it was a one-off issue that requires no action (for example, Bedrock was down or it is a duplicated issue), you can close it.

Remember rule #2: Never un-assign yourself from a real DeployBlocker unless you are 100% sure someone else is assigned and will take care of it.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @trjExpensify (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[github-actions]

👋 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:

1. Identify the pull request that introduced this issue and revert it.
2. Find someone who can quickly fix the issue.
3. Fix the issue yourself.

[m-natarajan]

@rlinoz FYI I haven't added the External label as I wasn't 100% sure about this issue. Please take a look and add the label if you agree it's a bug and can be handled by external contributors

[trjExpensify]

I can reproduce this reliably:

• iouReport details: Members not shown
• iouTransaction details: Members shown briefly and then disappears

@rlinoz I'll be curious to follow the git blame to see where we made the changes to not show Members in iouReport/iouTransaction details.

[rlinoz]

So, I am not sure the header on iou transactions should be clickable at all, at least it is not clickable in prod, trying to find where we changed that.

[rlinoz]

oh, that was considered a bug, and we enabled the tap now.

[rlinoz]

Ok, so I think this is a problem that we had before, it just wasn't possible to click on.

I'll be curious to follow the git blame to see where we made the changes to not show Members in iouReport/iouTransaction details.

That is hard to follow, we changed how participants work a lot recently, but I don't know if we should have ever shown members here, since the notification preference for transactions is hidden. Now we are actively filtering out hidden members, so that is why it is not showing the members section.

The problem of showing then hiding is happening because we are optimistically setting the members as not hidden for this types of reports. We get the participants here and always set them as hidden:false here.

@trjExpensify but I am curious, do you think we should bypass the notification preference here and show the participants?

[trjExpensify]

The problem of showing then hiding is happening because we are optimistically setting the members as not hidden for this types of reports. We get the participants here and always set them as hidden:false here.

Ahh, gotcha. So until the report is unhidden, members don't show. Gotcha! That makes sense, I guess. 👍

[rlinoz]

Nice, I will remove the deploy blocker label as this problem and the members section being hidden is the correct behavior, and open it up for proposals.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~012a67c3a384fec2d0

[Pujan92]

@rlinoz To confirm, for all transaction threads hidden will be true from the backend? Bcoz if that is the case then we should update the optimistic value specifically for the transaction threads in the front end to make it consistent.

[rlinoz]

Yes, for every new transaction thread every member will be hidden until they perform some action on it.

[Pujan92]

Thanks @rlinoz.

@GandalfGwaihir and @cretadn22's main solution proposed to update the condition inside the ReportDetailsPage component, but I think it's better to update optimistic data for the transaction threads correctly which will be consistent with backend.

I prefer to move with @nkdengineer's proposal where for any of the transaction threads we should set hidden to true for participants.

🎀👀🎀 C+ reviewed

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @rlinoz is eligible for the choreEngineerContributorManagement assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @Pujan92 🎉 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]

📣 @nkdengineer 🎉 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 📖

[nkdengineer]

@Pujan92 The PR is here.

[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 1.4.77-11 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix member option appear in transaction thread report detail page #42036

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-06-06. 🎊

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

• @Pujan92 requires payment automatic offer (Reviewer)
• @nkdengineer 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:

• [@Pujan92] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@Pujan92] 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:
• [@Pujan92] 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:
• [@Pujan92] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@Pujan92] 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.
• [@trjExpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[Pujan92]

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:

• [@Pujan92] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: Create Group Chats + Splits. #37458
• [@Pujan92] 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/37458/files#r1629616409
• [@Pujan92] 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: NA
• [@Pujan92] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug. No
• [@Pujan92] 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.

[trjExpensify]

Payment summary as follows:

• $250 to @nkdengineer for the fix
• $250 to @Pujan92 for the C+ review

Paid!