Closed lanitochka17 closed 1 month ago
Triggered auto assignment to @dylanexpensify (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.
@dylanexpensify 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
The hold status isn't removed immediately from the money request preview.
The hold status comes from the transaction.comment.hold
status or the transaction violations.
https://github.com/Expensify/App/blob/bb9b4864694e6a97ee00bd07e3d87e9d9d462e6b/src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestPreview/MoneyRequestPreviewContent.tsx#L111
https://github.com/Expensify/App/blob/bb9b4864694e6a97ee00bd07e3d87e9d9d462e6b/src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestPreview/MoneyRequestPreviewContent.tsx#L130
When we hold, the transaction.comment.hold
is set, but the transaction violations are still empty. After we reopen the transaction thread, the transaction violations are returned from the BE. When we unhold the request, we only optimistically remove the transaction.comment.hold
.
https://github.com/Expensify/App/blob/bb9b4864694e6a97ee00bd07e3d87e9d9d462e6b/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts#L7041-L7059
So, the transaction violations (that contain hold violations) still exist, thus the money request preview still shows the hold status. Reopening the transaction thread once again will clear it.
Optimistically removes the transaction violations of hold when unhold-ing a request. (and revert it when fails)
{
onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.SET,
key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION_VIOLATIONS}${transactionID}`,
value: transactionViolations?.filter((violation) => violation.name !== 'hold') ?? [],
},
I also suggest to return the onyx update to clears the hold violation from the UnholdRequest API.
(we can also optimistically add the hold violation if needed, lmk if we should do it)
moving!
Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01785e48b0c37e8c52
Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @paultsimura (External
)
Reviewing today π
The proposal by @bernhardoj looks good to me.
πππ C+ reviewed
@cead22 sorry if you're the wrong person, but IIRC you were implementing the violations initially. We should modify the BE to remove the hold
violation on the UnholdRequest
API endpoint (in addition to the App changes). Could you please check it?
Triggered auto assignment to @Beamanator, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.
I'm OOO today, hopefully @cead22 can check the comments above - if not, I'll get back to this by wednesday / thursday
@Beamanator, @paultsimura, @dylanexpensify Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!
π£ @paultsimura π An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Reviewer role π Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!
We should modify the BE to remove the
hold
violation on theUnholdRequest
API endpoint (in addition to the App changes). Could you please check it?
I created an issue for us to update this
PR is ready
cc: @paultsimura
Thanks @cead22 - I am happy to review the PR for this front end part, but also feel free to assign yourself if you want it π
Reviewing
label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".
The solution for this issue has been :rocket: deployed to production :rocket: in version 9.0.9-5 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 2024-07-26. :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:
Payment coming up!
Do we agree π or π
Triggered auto assignment to @OfstadC (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.
@OfstadC I'm heading OOO starting this afternoon, so reassigning for payment! TY!
Payment is due today. Requested in ND.
@paultsimura paid $250 via Upwork @bernhardoj due $250 via NewDot
$250 approved for @bernhardoj
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: 9.0.5-3 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/4700894&group_by=cases:section_id&group_id=309128&group_order=asc Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): gocemate+workspaceapprover135@gmail.com Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team
Action Performed:
Preconditions:
Expected Result:
There should be no red dot on the unheld expense
Actual Result:
Red dot remains when approver unhold expense
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/78819774/c8fa0886-2f65-4585-9459-2498c5609c95
View all open jobs on GitHub
Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit
Issue Owner
Current Issue Owner: @dylanexpensify