[HOLD for payment 2023-07-14] [$1000] 'All members' option shown on #admins channel

[kavimuru]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Action Performed:

1. Go to staging dot on web chrome and login with User A
2. Create a new workspace and invite User B
3. From User A, notice #admins channel and #announce channel has been created.
4. On User B side, only #announce channel has been created (which works fine)
5. On User A side, click on header and click on settings. Notice that on 'Who can post' option, there is the presence of "All members'
6. User B has no access to admins channel of Uer's A workspace. Thus, in the User A side on admins channel, there should not be a functionality of 'All members' since User A can only use the admins channel

   Expected Result:

   'All members' option should not be shown on #admins channel

   Actual Result:

   'All members' option shown on #admins channel

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 / Chrome
• [ ] iOS / native
• [ ] iOS / Safari
• [x] MacOS / Chrome / Safari
• [ ] MacOS / Desktop

Version Number: 1.3.31-2 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 Notes/Photos/Videos: Any additional supporting documentation

https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/43996225/30de3e96-d7a3-401a-a10a-4364a7c66e84

https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/43996225/f695fd96-2034-4ba3-b861-a05242d3f340

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL: Issue reported by: @priya-zha Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1686811997908099

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0120663c9a61374fde
• Upwork Job ID: 1673407870785880064
• Last Price Increase: 2023-06-26

[iwiznia]

Seems this is mostly ready, so not unassigning myself, but if this does not get closed, @maddylewis please unassign and re-assign another engineer since I am going on sabbatical

[sobitneupane]

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:

• [ ] [@sobitneupane] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:

https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/19094

• [ ] [@sobitneupane] 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/19094#issuecomment-1648022253

• [ ] [@sobitneupane] 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:

It was the case missed while adding the functionality. So, I don't think updating PR review checklist will help.

• [ ] [@sobitneupane] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.

Yes

• [ ] [@sobitneupane] 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.

[sobitneupane]

Regression Test Proposal

1. Open an admin channel
2. Click on header then choose settings
3. Verify that admin cannot change "Who can post" option and it set to "Admins only"

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[maddylewis]

regression test added / everyone is paid.

[sobitneupane]

Payment requested on newDot.

[JmillsExpensify]

@maddylewis Can you please summarize the appropriate individual payments for all parties involved in this issue? This is holding up @sobitneupane's NewDot payments. More information on this compliance process in Slack.

[maddylewis]

@JmillsExpensify - here you go! https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/21418#issuecomment-1636263905

[JmillsExpensify]

Ah so to confirm, no urgency bonus applies for this issue?

[maddylewis]

@JmillsExpensify - correct!

[maddylewis]

my original payment breakdown incorrectly excluded the urgency bonus. here is the correct breakdown:

Payments:

• [x] $250 reporting bonus - @priya-zha
• [x] $1500 C+ @sobitneupane (paid via NewDot)
• [x] $1500 contributor - @dukenv0307

i need to process the urgency bonus for @dukenv0307! I'll confirm here once I've done that 👍

[JmillsExpensify]

Great thank you! Yes, looking at the assignment date and then when the PR is merged I agree that this should qualify for an urgency bonus.

Additionally, I've reviewed the details for @sobitneupane. These details are accurate based on summary from Business Reviewer and are now approved for payment in NewDot.

[dukenv0307]

hi @maddylewis I think I was mistakenly paid on 2 different Upwork jobs on this same issue (each for $1k). Can you request a refund for $500 ($2000 actually paid minus $1500 payment)

[maddylewis]

thank you for clarifying that @dukenv0307 - and, yes! on it now.

[maddylewis]

alright, requested that refund. lmk once that's all set and i will close this one out.

[maddylewis]

@dukenv0307 - will you lmk if that refund went through on your end? ty!

[dukenv0307]

@maddylewis I thought there might be some processing on Upwork side on that refund but so far I haven't seen any refund request on Upwork or email so I'm not sure how to proceed.

From my side I can proactively "Give a refund" on one of the job if that also works? (But it won't be linked to the refund request you made earlier I think)

[maddylewis]

@dukenv0307 - okay, i tried again. lmk if that went through this time around.

[dukenv0307]

@dukenv0307 - okay, i tried again. lmk if that went through this time around.

@maddylewis done! (it's requested a $1k refund but I did $500 as mentioned here)