Closed kavimuru closed 6 months ago
Triggered auto assignment to @greg-schroeder (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.
Triggered auto assignment to @MonilBhavsar (DeployBlockerCash
), see https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/9980/ for more details.
:wave: Friendly reminder that deploy blockers are time-sensitive β± 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:
@MonilBhavsar 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.
We think this bug might be related to #vip-split
Is this working correctly on production?
On prod, the split is added to the same group chat. On staging, it is added to a new group chat.
Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~012731ac59083f0155
Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @DylanDylann (External
)
@Gonals can you please have a look? Seems like we might not be saving the correct reportID to the NVP in this case
This does seem like a server side issue to me
I was wrong. QuickAction NVP seems correct, so client side issue
The new split expense is created in a new group chat.
When we create split bill via QAB, we're calling splitBillAndOpenReport
which will always create a new optimistic report because in this function, we call createSplitsAndOnyxData
with existingSplitChatReportID
param as empty
In the case we create a split bill via QAB that means the report already exists we should call splitBill
function as the same here which already handle this case and also navigate to the correctly report after creating.
We should fix the same for IOURequestStepScan
and IOURequestStepDistance
page
NA
@Gonals can you please have a look? Seems like we might not be saving the correct reportID to the NVP in this case
I noticed this bug, but it didn't have anything to do with the QAB (when I tested). It happened for non-QAB flows too π€·
I'll test again in a bit
Yep. This happens whenever you try to split again between the same group from global creation, QAB flow or not. Not a blocker
Thank you for looking Alberto!
@nkdengineer can you please confirm your proposal for all the split cases
@nkdengineer can you please confirm your proposal for all the split cases
@MonilBhavsar Sure, the bug only happens when we create a split request with skipping the confirmation step (via QAB). So we only need to fix this case as I mentioned in my proposal.
@nkdengineer's proposal looks good to me
πππ C+ reviewed
Current assignee @MonilBhavsar is eligible for the choreEngineerContributorManagement assigner, not assigning anyone new.
π£ @DylanDylann π An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Reviewer role π Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!
π£ @nkdengineer π An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role π 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 π§βπ» Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing π
@DylanDylann The PR is here.
Reviewing
label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".
The solution for this issue has been :rocket: deployed to production :rocket: in version 1.4.66-5 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period :calendar:. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:
If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-05-03. :confetti_ball:
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:
Payments made and job closed. @DylanDylann can you take care of the checklist? Thanks!
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:
[@DylanDylann] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/39413 [@DylanDylann] 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/39413#discussion_r1588976721 [@DylanDylann] 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 [@DylanDylann] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug. Yes [@DylanDylann] 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.
Regression Test Proposal
Do we agree π or π
Looks good, but we might have a regression here https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/40961#issuecomment-2095565285
@MonilBhavsar I tested and it still works for me on the latest main.
@greg-schroeder @MonilBhavsar @DylanDylann @nkdengineer this issue was created 2 weeks ago. Are we close to approving a proposal? If not, what's blocking us from getting this issue assigned? Don't hesitate to create a thread in #expensify-open-source to align faster in real time. Thanks!
@greg-schroeder @MonilBhavsar @DylanDylann @nkdengineer this issue was created 2 weeks ago. Are we close to approving a proposal? If not, what's blocking us from getting this issue assigned? Don't hesitate to create a thread in #expensify-open-source to align faster in real time. Thanks!
tested and it still works for me on the latest main.
π We can close this after creating regression test
Filing thing, thanks all!
If you havenβt already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!
Version Number: 1.4.64-0 Reproducible in staging?: y Reproducible in production?: n If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: N/A Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856 Expensify/Expensify Issue URL: Issue reported by: Applause internal team Slack conversation:
Action Performed:
Expected Result:
The new split expense will be created in the same group chat (production behavior).
Actual Result:
The new split expense is created in a new group chat.
Workaround:
unknown
Platforms:
Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?
Screenshots/Videos
Add any screenshot/video evidence
https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/43996225/dab5aa85-bca1-4b58-adf6-a84390f6d92f
View all open jobs on GitHub
Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit