-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.9k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[HOLD for payment 2024-08-29] [$250] Dupe detect-Removing receipt on confirmation page also removes receipt from the actual expense #46373
Comments
Triggered auto assignment to @anmurali ( |
@anmurali FYI I haven't added the External label as I wasn't 100% sure about this issue. Please take a look and add the label if you agree it's a bug and can be handled by external contributors |
We think that this bug might be related to #wave-collect - Release 2 |
ProposalPlease re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.When user removes the receipt from the confirmation page, the receipt on the actual expense is also removed, even when the Confirm button is not clicked What is the root cause of that problem?We should not allow edit/delete the receipt when in duplicate confirmation page, just like other fields are not editable. App/src/pages/TransactionDuplicate/Confirmation.tsx Lines 79 to 82 in 86b923d
What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?To do that, we need to implement a mechanism to pass
|
Proposal Update
|
Edited by proposal-police: This proposal was edited at 2023-10-10T12:34:56Z. ProposalPlease re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.Dupe detect-Removing receipt on confirmation page also removes receipt from the actual expense What is the root cause of that problem?
money_request_confrimation.mp4What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?
What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)
Resultreceipt_image_interactive_dupe_detection.mp4AlternativeWe can check the last route and if it is const isLastRouteDuplicateReview = (navigationRef.getRootState()?.routes?.at(-2)?.params?.params?.screen ?? '') === SCREENS.TRANSACTION_DUPLICATE.REVIEW;
const canEditReceipt = ReportUtils.canEditFieldOfMoneyRequest(parentReportAction, CONST.EDIT_REQUEST_FIELD.RECEIPT) && !isLastRouteDuplicateReview;
// If we want to hide the three dot icon, we can modify `allowDownload` prop.
allowDownload={!isEReceipt && !isLastRouteDuplicateReview} App/src/pages/TransactionReceiptPage.tsx Line 36 in f7e265a
App/src/pages/TransactionReceiptPage.tsx Line 62 in f7e265a
Result AlternativeMonosnap.screencast.2024-07-31.18-11-07.mp4 |
Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01e50d0c63fac1b4f3 |
Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @sobitneupane ( |
Proposal Updated
|
@sobitneupane mind reviewing the proposals so far? |
Thanks for the proposal everyone. Proposal from @Krishna2323 looks good to me. 🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed |
Triggered auto assignment to @stitesExpensify, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details. |
true |
@sobitneupane That means they cannot even preview the receipt. I think we only need to block deleting. @JmillsExpensify can you confirm the expected behavior here? |
I agree, they should be able to open the receipt in the full screen mode, but it's read-only, like the other fields on the expense in this dupe confirmation screen - so we should remove the three dot overflow menu in this case: CC: @pecanoro for vis as well :) |
@anmurali, @sobitneupane, @stitesExpensify Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick! |
📣 @gijoe0295 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app! Offer link |
@gijoe0295 mind giving us a rough idea of when you'll have the PR raised for review? |
|
The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.0.23-0 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue: If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-08-29. 🎊 For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:
|
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:
|
@anmurali This is ready for payment. |
Regression Test Proposal:
Do we agree 👍 or 👎 |
I don't think we can blame the PR for creating this issue as it is more of a feature-request than a bug.
Yes.
|
@anmurali, @sobitneupane, @stitesExpensify, @gijoe0295 Huh... This is 4 days overdue. Who can take care of this? |
@anmurali all you on this one! |
@anmurali, @sobitneupane, @stitesExpensify, @gijoe0295 Still overdue 6 days?! Let's take care of this! |
@anmurali, @sobitneupane, @stitesExpensify, @gijoe0295 Now this issue is 8 days overdue. Are you sure this should be a Daily? Feel free to change it! |
Payment Summary
|
$250 approved for @sobitneupane |
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: 9.0.13-3
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: Y
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: N/A
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team
Action Performed:
Expected Result:
Since user is removing the receipt from the confirmation page, the receipt on the actual expense will not be removed, as the changes have not been "confirmed" yet
Actual Result:
When user removes the receipt from the confirmation page, the receipt on the actual expense is also removed, even when the Confirm button is not clicked
Workaround:
Unknown
Platforms:
Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?
Screenshots/Videos
Add any screenshot/video evidence
Bug6554746_1722091745819.bandicam_2024-07-27_22-40-17-853.mp4
View all open jobs on GitHub
Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit
Issue Owner
Current Issue Owner: @anmuraliThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: