[$250] Moving a user to an OldDot domain group with a preferred workspace puts them on the workspace chat beta

[m-natarajan]

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

---

Version Number: 9.0.16-4 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 Expensify/Expensify Issue URL: Issue reported by: @muttmuure Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1722600157187309

Action Performed:

1. Be a workspace admin for a workspace and a domain admin for your domain
2. Create a "domain group" in Domains > Groups on Expensify Classic and set a Preferred Workspace for the domain group you created (the workspace you are an admin for)
3. On the Domain Members page, move user A to your new domain group.
4. As user A, create expenses and submit a report on the preferred workspace
5. As the workspace admin, navigate to New Expensify

   Expected Result:

   Because the workspace chat beta is disabled (you can check this by running Policy.getCurrent().policy.isPolicyExpenseChatEnabled in your console with the workspace open on OldDot, no workspace chats are created in New Expensify for that workspace.

   Actual Result:

   There is a workspace chat created for the report that user A just submitted.

   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?

• [x] Android: Native
• [x] Android: mWeb Chrome
• [x] iOS: Native
• [x] iOS: mWeb Safari
• [x] MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• [x] MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/47d5d447-3ecf-42ee-bae8-de127c6b1800

Add any screenshot/video evidence

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01e7149bdde9a575ca
• Upwork Job ID: 1821180644925581221
• Last Price Increase: 2024-08-07

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @rayane-djouah

[melvin-bot[bot]]

Triggered auto assignment to @zanyrenney (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.

[melvin-bot[bot]]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01e7149bdde9a575ca

[melvin-bot[bot]]

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

[melvin-bot[bot]]

Triggered auto assignment to @rlinoz (AutoAssignerNewDotQuality)

[rlinoz]

PR is up!

[rayane-djouah]

Unassigning myself as this is internal

[rlinoz]

The fix is deployed: https://github.com/Expensify/Auth/pull/11969#issuecomment-2284821275

[muttmuure]

@rlinoz I'm still seeing a lot of workspace chats in my account despite the customer not being on the beta. Is this something we can look into in Slack (not here because of sensitive data?)

[rlinoz]

@muttmuure started a thread here

[muttmuure]

Added more examples in thread

[zanyrenney]

how are we doing with this one @rlinoz

[muttmuure]

We chatted about this and @puneetlath thinks that what I am seeing is actually expected behavior. I'm not convinced this isn't a bug

[rlinoz]

From the last chat we had I think we are good on this one? I mean, we may still have problems with the LHN but the specific issue of creating new workspace chats for policies that don't have it enabled is gone?

[zanyrenney]

Seeing as Matt thinks this is expected behaviour and you think this issue is not appearing Rodridgo, going t close this out. Feel free to reopen if either of you disagree.