[HOLD https://github.com/Expensify/Auth/pull/12960] [$250] Workspace-As admin,opening expense details page in archived control WS directs to hmm not here

[izarutskaya]

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: 9.0.33-1 Reproducible in staging?: Y Reproducible in production?: Y Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856 Issue reported by: Applause-Internal team

Action Performed:

1. Launch app
2. Create a workspace and invite a member as employee
3. Tap on a category - gl code
4. Upgrade to control workspace
5. Enter gl and payroll code and save it
6. From settings, select members must categorize all expenses
7. In mweb, login as employee
8. Open employee workspace chat
9. Create a expense with big amount, future date
10. As admin, delete this control workspace
11. Note the expense details page in archived workspace of both employee and admin

Expected Result:

As admin, opening expense details page in archived control workspace must not direct to hmm not here .

Actual Result:

As admin, opening expense details page in archived control workspace directs to hmm not here but as employee can view expense.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?

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

Screenshots/Videos

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/267f3c2a-765e-48df-9a4f-7404e69921a1

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021836148946035230114
• Upwork Job ID: 1836148946035230114
• Last Price Increase: 2024-09-24
• Automatic offers:
• shubham1206agra | Reviewer | 104114173

[melvin-bot[bot]]

Triggered auto assignment to @johncschuster (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]]

@johncschuster Huh... This is 4 days overdue. Who can take care of this?

[melvin-bot[bot]]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021836148946035230114

[melvin-bot[bot]]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @shubham1206agra (External)

[burczu]

Hi, I’m Bartek from Callstack and I would like to investigate this issue.

[shubham1206agra]

@johncschuster Please assign @burczu here

[melvin-bot[bot]]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[melvin-bot[bot]]

@johncschuster, @shubham1206agra Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

[melvin-bot[bot]]

📣 @shubham1206agra 🎉 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[bot]]

@johncschuster @burczu @shubham1206agra 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!

[burczu]

Thanks for assigning me to the issue. I was able to reproduce the issue and from what I see for admin, when we try to access the expense details report, we get the Report not found error from the backend:

So I suspect this issue may be related to the backend - especially we don't get this error for an employee, so it looks like the report is not accessible in circumstances described in this issue. I'll spend some more time digging deeper to check if there is something else on the frontend side that may cause this, but I didn't find anything promising yet.

[johncschuster]

Thanks, @burczu! I'll take it internal then!

[johncschuster]

@shubham1206agra are you able to work on this?

[shubham1206agra]

@johncschuster I am not an internal employee. Please apply hot pick to assign an engineer.

[johncschuster]

Thanks, @shubham1206agra! I've done that now.

[johncschuster]

Waiting on this to get picked up

[melvin-bot[bot]]

@johncschuster @burczu @shubham1206agra this issue is now 4 weeks old, please consider:

• Finding a contributor to fix the bug
• Closing the issue if BZ has been unable to add the issue to a VIP or Wave project
• If you have any questions, don't hesitate to start a discussion in #expensify-open-source

Thanks!

[melvin-bot[bot]]

@johncschuster, @burczu, @shubham1206agra Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

[johncschuster]

Still waiting on this one to get picked up

[trjExpensify]

@srikarparsi curious for your input here, seems like another reason to execute this plan to not archive expense reports on workspace deletion: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C036QM0SLJK/p1728047968818889?thread_ts=1728047962.737329&cid=C036QM0SLJK

Moving to the #quality GH project where the remaining "closed and archived" work has moved.

[melvin-bot[bot]]

@johncschuster, @burczu, @shubham1206agra Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[johncschuster]

Not overdue, Melvin. We're looking for some insight from @srikarparsi.

[srikarparsi]

@srikarparsi curious for your input here, seems like another reason to execute this plan to not archive expense reports on workspace deletion:

So it's kind of two different things in the code at least.

• Archiving expense reports and transaction threads happens here This is going to stop once this PR gets merged.

• Unsharing open expense reports from admins and auditors happens here

  I think this bug is happening because of the unsharing part. Maybe we should stop unsharing open reports from admins?

[trjExpensify]

I think this bug is happening because of the unsharing part.

Intereeesting. Are you saying these open expense reports remain on the workspace, but the admins/auditors of said workspace lose access to them? 🤔

[johncschuster]

Not overdue. Still discussing

[johncschuster]

@srikarparsi can you take a look at Tom's last message when you get a moment?

[srikarparsi]

Intereeesting. Are you saying these open expense reports remain on the workspace, but the admins/auditors of said workspace lose access to them? 🤔

Yup, exactly. This comment: Unshare all open reports from admins and auditors.

[trjExpensify]

Yeah, so I think the question comes down to:

Q: When a workspace is deleted, should the admins/auditors retain access to the open expense reports on the workspace to be able to move those somewhere else?

1. If yes, then we shouldn't unshare them and allow the admins to Move report somewhere else (i.e another workspace that they're an admin of).
2. If no, then we should continue to unshare them with anyone but the submitter (who can Move report elsewhere, including an option for the selfDM which would unreport the expenses).

I don't really see the downside of (1). Do you, @JmillsExpensify @twisterdotcom?

Another option might have been to automatically move the open expense reports off the workspace on deletion and to the member's individual workspace, but the notion of a "personal workspace" in NewDot doesn't exist. The closest equivalent would be the selfDM, but that would mean auto-unreporting all the expenses (as only unreported expenses exist in the selfDM), which I'm not sure a submitter would appreciate more than just keeping the open report intact and being able to move it elsewhere to another workspace or unreport the expenses on their own accord.

[johncschuster]

(Still discussing, Melvin)

[twisterdotcom]

I do prefer leaving the former admins with some access, and I don't see any problem with doing that.

[melvin-bot[bot]]

@johncschuster, @burczu, @shubham1206agra Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[johncschuster]

Discussing

[trjExpensify]

I do prefer leaving the former admins with some access, and I don't see any problem with doing that.

Cool, then I think we do (1) then. 👍

[johncschuster]

Sounds good! @srikarparsi, will you be taking this on?

[melvin-bot[bot]]

@johncschuster, @burczu, @shubham1206agra Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[johncschuster]

@trjExpensify I believe @srikarparsi's plate is pretty full at the moment. Should we get this issue redistributed, or can it wait until his bandwidth opens back up?

[trjExpensify]

Srikar isn't assigned in the first place, so it's available as a Hot pick in the meantime if someone can pick it up.

[srikarparsi]

Hey sorry! I started looking at this and there's a little more to unpack because we also unshare all archived reports from everyone except the owner here. I'm going to think about this tomorrow and might have a couple of questions about expected behavior but I think I can take this on.

[srikarparsi]

Ok, so we do two things in terms of un-sharing:

1. When a policy is deleted, we un-share all open reports with admins and auditors.
2. When a policy is deleted, we un-share all archived reports from everyone except the policy owner.

We're still archiving expense reports in the context of the code (they will still have the private_isArchived rNVP so that we can know to hide action buttons - submit, pay, etc. - in the frontend)

I know we had some other discussions about what reports should be accessible to who after a policy has been deleted. @trjExpensify or @twisterdotcom do you have any thoughts on this and I can move forward with implementing it?

[trjExpensify]

I'm not sure what exactly you're asking for thoughts on, but to summarise on this.

• When a policy is deleted, don't modify the expense report's state or unshare it with the participants of the report. Leave that alone, just hide the Submit, Approve, or Pay actions (which ever is applicable to the report state) and prevent additional expenses from being added to it. This ensures that:
  • Backwards compatibility with OldDot is maintained for report commenting, because they can still be added to an expense report.
  • We prevent actions that result in immediate errors because they can't be taken on a report that's associated with a deleted workspace
  • Users maintain access to the expense reports, so they can move them to another workspace in light of this policy being deleted (pending other restrictions like report state, exported status etc) to progress elsewhere.

[srikarparsi]

I'm not sure what exactly you're asking for thoughts on

Sorry, the part I wanted thoughts on was who loses access to each type of report after a policy has been deleted. So for example right now I believe:

Owners: Lose access to all open expense reports Admins: Lose access to all archived reports Auditors: Lose access to all archived reports Members: Lose access to all archived reports

And based on what you said above, is expected that: Owners: Retain access to all reports Admins: Lose access to all archived chat and task reports (not expense reports) Auditors: Lose access to all archived chat and task reports (not expense reports) Members: Lose access to all archived chat and task reports (not expense reports)

Is this right? Sorry for not clarifying earlier.

[trjExpensify]

Right, we aren't looking to modify the existing behaviour of other report types on policy deletion. We're clarifying what to do about expense reports only with this.

[srikarparsi]

Cool started on a PR here

[melvin-bot[bot]]

@johncschuster, @burczu, @srikarparsi, @shubham1206agra Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[johncschuster]

Chill out, Melvin. A PR is in the works!

[srikarparsi]

We are holding this for https://github.com/Expensify/Auth/pull/12960