[HOLD for payment 2024-06-20] [HOLD for payment 2024-06-18] Hold expense - Inconsistency in showing Submit button in main chat vs report for held expense

[m-natarajan]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

issue found when validating #42374
Version Number: 1.4.80-1
Reproducible in staging?: y
Reproducible in production?: n
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: Applause internal team
Slack conversation:

Action Performed:

Precondition:

• Submission frequency (Delayed submissions) is set to Manually on the workspace.
• Workspace chat has no unsettled expense.

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Go to workspace chat.
3. Create a manual expense.
4. Go to the transaction thread.
5. Click 3-dot menu > Hold.
6. Enter reason and save it.
7. Return to the main chat.

Expected Result:

There should be consistency in displaying (or not) the Submit button in the main chat preview and transaction thread.

Actual Result:

The main chat preview is showing Submit button, but the Submit button is missing in the transaction thread (combined report)

Workaround:

unknown

Platforms:

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

• Android: Native
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Native
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Bug6504164_1717693414223.20240607_005630.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @puneetlath

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @blimpich (DeployBlockerCash), see https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/9980/ for more details.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @puneetlath (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.

[github-actions]

👋 Friendly reminder that deploy blockers are time-sensitive ⏱ 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:

1. Identify the pull request that introduced this issue and revert it.
2. Find someone who can quickly fix the issue.
3. Fix the issue yourself.

[blimpich]

Should be hourly I'm pretty sure.

[srikarparsi]

This might also be related to this

[blimpich]

Yeah this seems like something that was overlooked in #42374.

I'm on the fence if we should revert or just make this follow up work. I don't think it's backend related because it appears that the HoldRequest command went through perfectly fine, so I lean towards this being a frontend issue.

Reverting #42374 fixes it in that it makes it impossible to hold the expense in this particular flow, so not much of a fix really.

[blimpich]

Seeing if I can find an easy fix

[blimpich]

@tienifr @dukenv0307 can you take a look into this as part of your work on #42374? I can assign you if that helps keep track of it.

cc: @NikkiWines

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ 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.

[tienifr]

Sorry I'm taking a look now.

[roryabraham]

Not a big deal because I caught it, but generally things should only be checked off after the issue is retested in staging and we verify that it no longer happens. In this case, the revert never actually made it to staging.

[melvin-bot]

Current assignees @puneetlath and @blimpich are eligible for the DeployBlockerCash assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[github-actions]

👋 Friendly reminder that deploy blockers are time-sensitive ⏱ 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:

1. Identify the pull request that introduced this issue and revert it.
2. Find someone who can quickly fix the issue.
3. Fix the issue yourself.

[kavimuru]

Issue is fixed.

43203.mp4

[kavimuru]

There is no payment due closing, reference

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.4.81-11 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Revert "feat: hold expense in one transaction view" #43237

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-06-18. 🎊

[melvin-bot]

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:

• [@puneetlath / @blimpich] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@puneetlath / @blimpich] 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:
• [@puneetlath / @blimpich] 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:
• [@puneetlath / @blimpich] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@puneetlath / @blimpich] 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.
• [@puneetlath] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.4.82-4 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Revert "feat: hold expense in one transaction view" #43237

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-06-20. 🎊

[melvin-bot]

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:

• [@puneetlath / @blimpich] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@puneetlath / @blimpich] 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:
• [@puneetlath / @blimpich] 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:
• [@puneetlath / @blimpich] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@puneetlath / @blimpich] 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.
• [@puneetlath] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon: