[HOLD for payment 2023-09-04] Wrong edit message shown in IOU report description when editing date

[kavimuru]

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

---

Action Performed:

1. Login to staging new dot
2. Click on + icon and select request money
3. Enter an amount and click next
4. Select ann account to request from and click on request
5. Click on the IOU report and go to IOU report description
6. Click on date and change date to any other date
7. Observe that the whisper message "removed the merchant... " rather than "changed date..."

Expected Result:

Displayed message should be "changed date..."

Actual Result:

"Removed merchant previously..." Message is displayed

Workaround:

Can the user still use Expensify without this being fixed? Have you informed them of the workaround?

Platforms:

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

• Android / native
• Android / Chrome
• iOS / native
• iOS / Safari
• MacOS / Chrome / Safari
• MacOS / Desktop

Version Number: 1.3.56-7
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
Notes/Photos/Videos: Any additional supporting documentation

2023_08_22_10_17_06.mp4

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @ayazhussain79
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1692732220565619

https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1692712587744049?thread_ts=1692712587.744049&cid=C049HHMV9SM

View all open jobs on GitHub

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @sophiepintoraetz (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details.

[melvin-bot]

Bug0 Triage Checklist (Main S/O)

• This "bug" occurs on a supported platform (ensure Platforms in OP are ✅)
• This bug is not a duplicate report (check E/App issues and #expensify-bugs)
  • If it is, comment with a link to the original report, close the issue and add any novel details to the original issue instead
• This bug is reproducible using the reproduction steps in the OP. S/O
  • If the reproduction steps are clear and you're unable to reproduce the bug, check with the reporter and QA first, then close the issue.
  • If the reproduction steps aren't clear and you determine the correct steps, please update the OP.
• This issue is filled out as thoroughly and clearly as possible
  • Pay special attention to the title, results, platforms where the bug occurs, and if the bug happens on staging/production.
• I have reviewed and subscribed to the linked Slack conversation to ensure Slack/Github stay in sync

[OSBotify]

👋 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.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @jasperhuangg (Engineering), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4319 for more details.

[daordonez11]

This is a BE issue:

Initially we create a request with empty merchant here is the body:

Then we send an "EditRequest" command with empty merchant and backend is saying that we changed the merchant from "Request" to "". Since we are not sending the merchant parameter in this second call.

Here is the body of the request:

And the failed response:

It seems like the default merchant is being wrongly setup. By default it should be empty and also if the parameter is not received it shouldn't try to "update" the value with ""

PS: This error is also happening in NewDot so not sure if it is a blocker.

cc @mountiny

[Pujan92]

Proposal

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

Shows incorrect merchant change on edit money request

What is the root cause of that problem?

Seems we are not setting the current value of merchant while calling EditMoneyRequest api call and not passing the field itself which causes the issue of Merchant is removed message.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

Lines 1035 to 1045 in 7640a6f

	const {created, amount, currency, comment} = ReportUtils.getTransactionDetails(updatedTransaction);
	API.write(
	'EditMoneyRequest',
	{
	transactionID,
	reportActionID: updatedReportAction.reportActionID,
	created,
	amount,
	currency,
	comment,
	},

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

Fetch field merchant also from getTransactionDetails and pass that to the api call body.

const {created, amount, currency, comment, merchant} = ReportUtils.getTransactionDetails(updatedTransaction);

Result

[jasperhuangg]

Hey guys, sorry in the interest of urgency I'm going to be addressing this internally, thank you for the proposals. Please only comment proposals on issues with the Help Wanted and External labels.

[jasperhuangg]

Hmm this doesn't seem to be happening locally. Could there be a mismatch between the versions of NewDot and Web-E that have been deployed to staging?

[jasperhuangg]

cc @mountiny

[Pujan92]

It happens locally for me.

Screen.Recording.2023-08-23.at.01.47.21.mov

[jasperhuangg]

@Pujan92 I meant to say happens locally with our local version of the PHP API, you're testing it against the staging version of the PHP API

[Pujan92]

Oh, ok. I think it should occur as merchant value we are omitting for editMoneyRequest and needs to be corrected from frontend pass but not very sure as it is not happening on your side.

[jasperhuangg]

Ah hmm, I'm actually able to reproduce it on my side now, sorry for the false alarm.

[Pujan92]

Cool, you can check my proposal if it makes sense.

[jasperhuangg]

@Pujan92 thanks for the proposal, but I think it makes more sense to add back-end validation here

[jasperhuangg]

Asked some clarifying questions here

Turns out it makes more sense to send back the merchant in the params. I know that's what you proposed in your proposal @Pujan92, but this issue technically wasn't open for proposals yet. In the interest of urgency I'm still going to be tackling this internally.

[Pujan92]

No issues @jasperhuangg , Thanks :)

[jasperhuangg]

We CPd a fix and this is fixed on staging!

[jasperhuangg]

@sophiepintoraetz seems we need to pay out @ayazhussain79 the reporting bonus before closing this out!

[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 1.3.57-6 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• [CP Staging] Pass merchant back when editing money requests #25719

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-09-04. 🎊

After the hold period is over and BZ checklist items are completed, please complete any of the applicable payments for this issue, and check them off once done.

• External issue reporter
• Contributor that fixed the issue
• Contributor+ that helped on the issue and/or PR

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

• @ayazhussain79 requires payment

As a reminder, here are the bonuses/penalties that should be applied for any External issue:

• Merged PR within 3 business days of assignment - 50% bonus
• Merged PR more than 9 business days after assignment - 50% penalty

[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:

• [@jasperhuangg] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: N/A, this wasn't as much a bug as it was an unimplemented feature. We forgot to add a field to a newly implemented API command.
• [@jasperhuangg] 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
• [@jasperhuangg] 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
• [@jasperhuangg] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug. N/A
• [@jasperhuangg] 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. N/A
• [@sophiepintoraetz] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon: N/A

[sophiepintoraetz]

offer sent @ayazhussain79!

[ayazhussain79]

@sophiepintoraetz offer accepted, Thank you

[sophiepintoraetz]

Paid!