[HOLD for payment 2024-08-14] [$250] Task – RHP present when delete task with reply

[lanitochka17]

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: 9.0.9-1
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: Y
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: https://expensify.testrail.io/index.php?/tests/view/4735083
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): [email protected]
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team

Action Performed:

1. Go to https://staging.new.expensify.com/
2. Log in
3. Open any chat
4. Create a task
5. Open task detail
6. Send comment
7. Click on header and delete the task

Expected Result:

RHP disappears when delete task with reply (see this comment)

Actual Result:

RHP present when delete task with reply, but disappears when delete IOU with reply

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

Bug6546285_1721315050981.Delete_task.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01d58ba540e5cc55b0
• Upwork Job ID: 1814135208916800159
• Last Price Increase: 2024-07-19
• Automatic offers:
• abdulrahuman5196 | Reviewer | 103251909
• dominictb | Contributor | 103251910

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @jliexpensify

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @jliexpensify (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.

[lanitochka17]

We think that this bug might be related to #vip-vsp

[lanitochka17]

@jliexpensify 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

[FitseTLT]

Proposal

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

Task – RHP present when delete task with reply

What is the root cause of that problem?

We are only navigating back if there are no visible actions !ReportActionsUtils.doesReportHaveVisibleActions

App/src/libs/actions/Task.ts

Lines 1058 to 1060 in 7ba66a1

	if (shouldDeleteTaskReport) {
	Navigation.goBack(ROUTES.REPORT_WITH_ID.getRoute(parentReport?.reportID ?? '-1'));
	}

App/src/libs/actions/Task.ts

Lines 923 to 924 in 7ba66a1

	const shouldDeleteTaskReport = !ReportActionsUtils.doesReportHaveVisibleActions(report.reportID ?? '-1');
	const optimisticReportAction: Partial<ReportUtils.OptimisticTaskReportAction> = {

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

We should dismiss modal in when the task has visible actions so change it to

if (shouldDeleteTaskReport) {
        Navigation.goBack(ROUTES.REPORT_WITH_ID.getRoute(parentReport?.reportID ?? '-1'));
    } else {
        Navigation.dismissModal();
    }

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

remove the if here if we want to navigate back to the parent

App/src/libs/actions/Task.ts

Line 1058 in 7ba66a1

if (shouldDeleteTaskReport) {

[dominictb]

Proposal

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

• RHP present when delete task with reply, but disappears when delete IOU with reply

What is the root cause of that problem?

• When deleting a task, we call:
  

  App/src/libs/actions/Task.ts

  Line 1059 in 7ba66a1

  Navigation.goBack(ROUTES.REPORT_WITH_ID.getRoute(parentReport?.reportID ?? '-1'));

  
  if the below value is true:
  

  App/src/libs/actions/Task.ts

  Line 923 in 7ba66a1

  const shouldDeleteTaskReport = !ReportActionsUtils.doesReportHaveVisibleActions(report.reportID ?? '-1');

• In our case, shouldDeleteTaskReport is false so it does not do any navigation action.

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

• (1) We should update:
  

  App/src/libs/actions/Task.ts

  Line 1059 in 7ba66a1

  Navigation.goBack(ROUTES.REPORT_WITH_ID.getRoute(parentReport?.reportID ?? '-1'));

  
  to:

        return ROUTES.REPORT_WITH_ID.getRoute(parentReport?.reportID ?? '-1');

• (2) Then:
  

  App/src/pages/ReportDetailsPage.tsx

  Lines 664 to 665 in 7ba66a1

  	Task.deleteTask(report);
  	navigateBackToAfterDelete.current = undefined;

  
  to:

            navigateBackToAfterDelete.current = Task.deleteTask(report);

• (3) Then:
  

  App/src/pages/ReportDetailsPage.tsx

  Line 772 in 7ba66a1

  return;

  
  to:

                            if (caseID === CASES.DEFAULT) {
                                if (navigateBackToAfterDelete.current) {
                                    Navigation.goBack(navigateBackToAfterDelete.current);
                                } else {
                                    Navigation.dismissModal();
                                }
                            }
                            return;

• Explanation: Generally, In step (1) we use the same approach as the delete expense flow to avoid the bug. In steps (2) and (3), we call Navigation.goback(...) if Task.deleteTask(report) return the defined value, otherwise, we call Navigation.dismissModal().

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

NA

[jliexpensify]

@lanitochka17 to confirm, are you expecting the RIght Hand Pane (RHP) to show when an expense is deleted? i.e. to mirror the Task?

[dominictb]

@jliexpensify FYI, we have decided to close the RHP in here

[jliexpensify]

Thanks @dominictb - yeah that's the behaviour I'm seeing when testing this, so I don't think this is a bug. Closing!

[dominictb]

@jliexpensify I think it is a bug because when deleting expenses, we close RHP, but not when deleting tasks. It is inconsistency

[jliexpensify]

Oh, I see - I misunderstood you! So you're saying the decision was made by Shawn that the RHP shouldn't exist when a task or/and an expense is deleted?

[dominictb]

@jliexpensify Yes

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01d58ba540e5cc55b0

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @abdulrahuman5196 (External)

[jliexpensify]

Thanks for clearing this up @dominictb - in that case, I agree: it's a bug

[melvin-bot]

@jliexpensify, @abdulrahuman5196 Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[jliexpensify]

bump @abdulrahuman5196 we have a proposal

[abdulrahuman5196]

Hi, Will check on this tomorrow

[abdulrahuman5196]

Checking now

[abdulrahuman5196]

@dominictb 's proposal here looks good and works well. It is inline with the current expense deletion flow.
But one suggestion to instead of doing step 3 in the mentioned place, we can add another if statement to differentiate task deletion like done here, anyways that could be handled in the PR.

App/src/pages/ReportDetailsPage.tsx

Lines 663 to 666 in 7ba66a1

	if (caseID === CASES.DEFAULT) {
	Task.deleteTask(report);
	navigateBackToAfterDelete.current = undefined;
	return;

🎀 👀 🎀
C+ Reviewed

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @thienlnam, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @abdulrahuman5196 🎉 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]

📣 @dominictb 🎉 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 📖

[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 9.0.17-2 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: dismiss modal after deleting task #46272

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-08-14. 🎊

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

• @abdulrahuman5196 requires payment automatic offer (Reviewer)
• @dominictb 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:

• [@abdulrahuman5196] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@abdulrahuman5196] 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:
• [@abdulrahuman5196] 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:
• [@abdulrahuman5196] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@abdulrahuman5196] 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.
• [@jliexpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[jliexpensify]

Bump @abdulrahuman5196 for the checklist

Payment Summary

• C: @dominictb $250
• C+: @abdulrahuman5196 $250 (ND Payment)

Upwork job

[abdulrahuman5196]

The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
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:
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:

Doesn't seem to be a regression

Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.

Yes.

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.

1. Go to NewDot
2. Open any chat
3. Create a task
4. Open task detail
5. Send comment
6. Click on header and delete the task
7. Verify that: RHP disappears when delete task with reply

@jliexpensify I am getting paid via newDot.

[JmillsExpensify]

$250 approved for @abdulrahuman5196

[jliexpensify]

Paid and job closed.