Group - All recents users selected when clicking on "Add to group"

[kbecciv]

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: v1.4.36-0
Reproducible in staging?: y
Reproducible in production?: yn
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:

1. Click on "+"
2. Go to the "Start chat"
3. Click on "Add to group" of recents users

Expected Result:

Only one user should be selected when clicking on "Add to group"

Actual Result:

All recents users selected when clicking on "Add to group"

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

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6365181_1706899051810.2024-02-02_21-31-14.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~016be032c785f4143f
• Upwork Job ID: 1754458637091528704
• Last Price Increase: 2024-02-05

[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.

[melvin-bot]

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

[kbecciv]

We think that this bug might be related to #vip-vsb
CC @quinthar

[shubham1206agra]

Offending PR: #34847
cc @Krishna2323

[Krishna2323]

@shubham1206agra, I don't think it's coming from that PR, still looking at it.

[marcaaron]

I believe it is caused by this very large PR

Debugging locally and there seems to be some issue with this commit

[s77rt]

The option selector isSelected logic compares multiple fields and some of these fields are not unique depending on the supplied list, e.g.:

• List of policies, we should compare policy id
• List of reports, we should compare report id
• List of accounts, we should compare account id

The problem is that the option selector does not know the type of list so even if we are supplying a list of account it still compares the policy id field (which is not unique among accounts).

I think the best to do here is to compare keyForList as it's the only field that's guaranteed to be unique.

[hayata-suenaga]

@s77rt I feel like your solution works the best. Since you review the PR, could you raise a PR to fix this please?

[s77rt]

@hayata-suenaga #35770

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~016be032c785f4143f

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

❌ There was an error making the offer to @s77rt for the Contributor role. The BZ member will need to manually hire the contributor.

[s77rt]

This can be closed. No payment is due here since it's part of the ideal nav.

[luacmartins]

Closing as per the comment above

[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 1.4.37-7 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• [CP Staging] Use keyForList in OptionsSelector's isSelected logic #35770

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-02-14. 🎊

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

• @s77rt 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:

• [@s77rt] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@s77rt] 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:
• [@s77rt] 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:
• [@s77rt] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@s77rt] 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.
• [@MitchExpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[s77rt]

• The PR that introduced the bug has been identified: [Wave 8] Ideal nav  #33280
• The offending PR has been commented on: Not needed
• A discussion in #expensify-bugs has been started: n/a
• Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug: No

[MitchExpensify]

Payment summary:

$500 - @s77rt (NewDot)

[s77rt]

@MitchExpensify No payment is required here.

[hayata-suenaga]

yep this is an issue for a regression stemmed from the Ideal Nav PR

sorry about that I should have specified that