[HOLD for payment 2024-07-26] [$250] Putting an expense on hold causes the Duplicate message to show in the transaction preview

[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!

---

Version Number: 9.0.2-0
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: @JmillsExpensify
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1719073168627369

Action Performed:

Have user A submit several expenses to user B on a Collect workspace
As user B, manually hold one of the expenses which is also a duplicate expense

Expected Result:

The dot separator pattern shows Hold

Actual Result:

The dot separator pattern shows Duplicate

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

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01f36e776d0a6fafaa
• Upwork Job ID: 1806349811933483381
• Last Price Increase: 2024-07-04
• Automatic offers:
• DylanDylann | Contributor | 103047266

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @joekaufmanexpensify

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @joekaufmanexpensify (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.

[bernhardoj]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

A duplicate and hold expense shows duplicate in the money request preview header.

What is the root cause of that problem?

When showing the violation, we only take the first violation.

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestPreview/MoneyRequestPreviewContent.tsx

Lines 189 to 197 in 403cecb

	const violations = TransactionUtils.getTransactionViolations(transaction.transactionID, transactionViolations);
	if (violations?.[0]) {
	const violationMessage = ViolationsUtils.getViolationTranslation(violations[0], translate);
	const violationsCount = violations.filter((v) => v.type === CONST.VIOLATION_TYPES.VIOLATION).length;
	const isTooLong = violationsCount > 1 || violationMessage.length > 15;
	const hasViolationsAndFieldErrors = violationsCount > 0 && hasFieldErrors;
	return `${message} ${CONST.DOT_SEPARATOR} ${isTooLong || hasViolationsAndFieldErrors ? translate('violations.reviewRequired') : violationMessage}`;
	}

If we have duplicated and hold, the violation array is: [duplicated, hold], that's why the duplicated is shown instead of hold.

We previously prioritized hold in this PR, but was reverted because it caused double Hold to show up. It's because we append the violation message (that contains hold) with another hold text. But it's not guaranteed that the hold violation is always at the first item of the violations.

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

If we want the hold to be prioritized over other violations, then we can set the violationMessage to hold if shouldShowHoldMessage is true.

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestPreview/MoneyRequestPreviewContent.tsx

Lines 190 to 191 in 403cecb

	if (violations?.[0]) {
	const violationMessage = ViolationsUtils.getViolationTranslation(violations[0], translate);

const violationMessage = shouldShowHoldMessage ? translate('violations.hold') : ViolationsUtils.getViolationTranslation(violations[0], translate);

OR

Sort the violations array which puts hold violation at the first item of the array.

const violations = TransactionUtils.getTransactionViolations(transaction.transactionID, transactionViolations)?.sort((violation1, violation2) => {
    if (violation1.name === 'hold') {
        return -1;
    }
    if (violation2.name === 'hold') {
        return 1;
    }
    return localeCompare(violation1.name, violation2.name);
});

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01f36e776d0a6fafaa

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @abdulrahuman5196 (External)

[joekaufmanexpensify]

cc @pecanoro as you mentioned in the slack thread you wanted to follow along

[nkdengineer]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

The dot separator pattern shows Duplicate

What is the root cause of that problem?

We always show the first violation in MoneyRequestPreviewContent meanwhile the newest violation is the last violation.

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestPreview/MoneyRequestPreviewContent.tsx

Lines 190 to 191 in 1d607ac

	if (violations?.[0]) {
	const violationMessage = ViolationsUtils.getViolationTranslation(violations[0], translate);

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

We should show the last violation here instead of the first violation

const violationsLength = (violations ?? []).length - 1;
if (violations?.[violationsLength]) {
    const violationMessage = ViolationsUtils.getViolationTranslation(violations[violationsLength], translate);

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestPreview/MoneyRequestPreviewContent.tsx

Lines 190 to 191 in 1d607ac

	if (violations?.[0]) {
	const violationMessage = ViolationsUtils.getViolationTranslation(violations[0], translate);

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Proposals awaiting review

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Same

[pecanoro]

@abdulrahuman5196 Friendly bump to review the proposal!

[melvin-bot]

@pecanoro, @abdulrahuman5196, @joekaufmanexpensify Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

[abdulrahuman5196]

Hi, Sorry for the delay. Will check on this today.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

TY!

[melvin-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]

@pecanoro, @abdulrahuman5196, @joekaufmanexpensify Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@abdulrahuman5196 is there an update here?

[abdulrahuman5196]

Hi, @joekaufmanexpensify Sorry for the delay. I am having lesser availability now. Kindly re-assign labels for another C+. I am unasigning myself.

[melvin-bot]

Reviewing label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.0.9-5 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: show Hold message instead of Duplicate when putting an expense o… #45325

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-07-26. 🎊

For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:

• @DylanDylann requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)
• @daledah requires payment (Needs manual offer from BZ)

[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:

• [@DylanDylann] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: N/A
• [@DylanDylann] 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: N/A
• [@DylanDylann] 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: N/A
• [@DylanDylann] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@DylanDylann] 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.
• [@joekaufmanexpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon: https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/415182

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@DylanDylann Please handle the BZ checklist so we can prep to issue payment this week

[DylanDylann]

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:

[@DylanDylann] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: NA
[@DylanDylann] 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: NA
[@DylanDylann] 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: NA
[@DylanDylann] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug. Yes
[@DylanDylann] 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.

Regression Test Proposal

1. Have user A submit two same expenses to user B on a Collect workspace
2. User B manually holds one of the expenses which is also a duplicate expense
3. Verify that: the held expense's dot separator pattern shows 'Hold'

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Looks solid! I will tackle this tomorrow.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@daledah is your Upwork account no longer active? I am no longer able to view it from when we paid you on a prior issue to send you an offer for this one.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

BZ checklist is complete!

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Payment owed here is:

• @daledah - $250 for PR via Upwork.
• @DylanDylann - $250 for C+ via Upwork.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

All set to issue payment!

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@DylanDylann $250 sent and contract ended!

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@daledah please apply for the job in Upwork, or confirm the status of your upwork profile so we can pay you.

[daledah]

@daledah is your Upwork account no longer active?

@joekaufmanexpensify It's working well now, could you send an offer to my profile https://www.upwork.com/freelancers/~0138d999529f34d33f

Thanks

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@daledah offer sent for $250!

[daledah]

@joekaufmanexpensify I accepted it now

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@daledah $250 sent and contract ended!

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Upwork job closed.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

All set, thanks everyone!