Open trjExpensify opened 4 weeks ago
Current assignee @trjExpensify is eligible for the NewFeature assigner, not assigning anyone new.
Put this on planning for a sec and assigned it to us @luacmartins while we just confirm on the Q here: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C036QM0SLJK/p1727219750037359?thread_ts=1727216730.118619&cid=C036QM0SLJK
I'm not sure this should be Uncategorized
and Untagged
given that we know we have customers that use Uncategorized
.
Why not? We've used that for years above the list of categories in the filters? I think that's fine.
We could name the rows "No category" and "No tag" if we want? It would match the search syntax of no:category
. I'm down for whatever.
I'm cool with matching the syntax and using No category
or No tag
Awesome that resolves my concern.
Updated!
You have everything you need here now to proceed, @luacmartins?
Yea, I think I have everything for now
Working on the draft PRs
@trjExpensify, @luacmartins Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!
@trjExpensify, @luacmartins Huh... This is 4 days overdue. Who can take care of this?
PRs in draft. I was ooo Mon/Tue and working reduced hours today, will come back to them tomorrow.
@trjExpensify is this the behavior we want for the No category
selector?
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/80c1ea46-b050-4636-a237-c8aeed3d5477
I find it strange being above the list when it's not selected. I'd vote to make it the top-most option in the list and then it moves above the list like selected category values do.
PRs in review
⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here
If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.
If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.
If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.
@luacmartins Just wanted to get some clarity on whether the regression was caused by FE and testing or comes from BE given the context mentioned in https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/50122#issuecomment-2419505654. Was I missing something when I tested the PR here ?
I know the PR was reverted so if the error was on my part and it was 100% FE related then it would make sense that no payment is due here for reviweing the reverted PR. What's your take on what happened ?
Will jump on reviewing the v2 PR once the auth PR is deployed and HOLD is lifted 👍
There were two issues:
No category
and No tag
options weren't persisted once we selected View results
and opened the page again. That was 100% frontend and fixed on this commitReviewing
label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".
The solution for this issue has been :rocket: deployed to production :rocket: in version 9.0.50-8 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 2024-10-25. :confetti_ball:
For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:
BugZero Checklist: The PR adding this new feature has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed:
No payment due here based on https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/49675#issuecomment-2420615383 because the PR was reverted due to regression.
Will jump on reviewing the v2 PR once the auth PR is deployed and HOLD is lifted 👍
Auth PR hit prod an hour ago: https://github.com/Expensify/Auth/pull/12812#issuecomment-2427681049
Reviewing
label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".
The solution for this issue has been :rocket: deployed to production :rocket: in version 9.0.52-5 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 2024-10-30. :confetti_ball:
For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:
BugZero Checklist: The PR adding this new feature has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed:
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: v9.0.39-2 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 Expensify/Expensify Issue URL: Issue reported by: customer in the NewDot feedback public room. Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C036QM0SLJK/p1727216730118619
Action Performed:
Actual results
Uncategorized
andUntagged
in the filters on the expenses page. We didn't add those to NewDot with the MVP, and so this is a feature request issue to add those two filters.Expected results
When you click the
Category
filter, there should be aNo category
row at the top above theCategory
subheader. When selected, it filters the results to include expenses with no category value selected.When you click the
Tag
filter, there should be anNo tag
row at the top above theTag
subheader. When selected, it filter the results to include expenses with no tag value selected.We use
no:
in the search syntax for this. I.eno:category
||no:tag
Workaround:
Yes, use OldDot to filter, but we really don't want them to switch back to Classic.
Platforms:
Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?
Screenshots/Videos
View all open jobs on GitHub
Issue Owner
Current Issue Owner: @trjExpensify