[Due for payment 2025-05-22] [Due for payment 2025-05-14] [Tracking] [External] Attendee Tracking project

[Julesssss]

Important Links

• Design Doc
• Pre-design
• Internal tracking issue

Strategy

In order to jump start viral growth, we need to migrate all existing customers to NewDot as soon as possible, so they can reap the rewards of the new app we've been building for several years.

Problem

It's common that one employee incurs an expense that includes others (eg: one person buys lunch for their whole office). There's no way to clearly outline this in NewDot though, so it can easily look like they overspent. This can drive manual back and forth between employee and admin, and cause significant loss of efficiency when compounded across the organization. A less efficient experience adds friction to enticing members to make the switch to NewDot and will slow down reunification.

Solution

Add support for attendee tracking in NewDot. This will make it easy for members to clearly indicate when spend is shared with others, and should reduce back and forth about larger than normal requests. The exact scope is TBD, but my thinking is we can do this by:

• Adding an Attendees row on requests in NewDot.
• Allowing members tap on the row, see a list of all eligible attendees, and select from the list.
• Surfacing selected attendees, and amount per person on request detailed.

Implementation Issues

Frontend:

• [HOLD for payment 2024-11-05] [CRITICAL] [Attendee Tracking] Create AttendeeSelectionPage #47171
• [HOLD for payment 2024-11-05] [HIGH] [Attendee Tracking] Create Attendees item row for requests #47172
• [HOLD for payment 2024-11-05] [HIGH] [Attendee Tracking] Create Attendees item row for editing requests #47173
• [HOLD for payment 2024-11-05] [Attendee Tracking] Submitter does not appear in attendee search results #48695
• [HOLD for payment 2024-11-05] [HOLD FOR PAYMENT OCTOBER 31st][$250] Merge App Attendee tracking feature branch  #51335

Backend

• https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/425201
• https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/419205
• https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/419206
• https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/419218
• [Attendee Tracking] Create 'UpdateMoneyRequestAttendees' command to replace 'EditMoneyRequest' #49326

TODO

Finish the project

• https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/429056
• [Attendee Tracking] Start using the correct nameValuePairs param for Create/Edit #48692
• Update UpdateMoneyRequestAttendees command to return missing onyx data: _transactions, _report, and reportNameValuePairs
• Within createUpdateMoneyRequestAttendees, update the users recent attendees and pass back to client
• App client should update the param used to pass attendees to backend
• App client should switch to the transaction.attendees onyx keys
• Unblock feature in client by reversing this commit

Post-launch polish:

• Clear out uses of the now-unused Auth attendee param
• Prevent violation bug by returning OnyxData like done here for other updates
• Add more tests like testRequestMoneyPersistsAttendees for edit case
• Attendee tracking feature should be a sub-category of 'Rules' #50802
• Once fully migrated, introduce minimum attendee size of 1:
  Request::verifyAttributeSize(request, "attendees", 0, Request::MAX_SIZE_NONCOLUMN);

Tasks

• Post Proposal (full Problem/Solution statement) in #expensify-open-source
• Wait at least one full business day, and until the post has a majority (2/3) of positive reactions (👍)
• Paste Proposal in the space above with a link to the Slack thread
• Email [email protected] and paste in the Proposal
• Fill out the High-level overview of the problem, Timeline, and Terminology sections of the Design Doc
• Email [email protected] (continue the same email chain as before) with the link to your Design Doc
• Host a pre-design meeting (example) in #expensify-open-source to discuss any necessary details in public before filling out the High-level of proposed solution section.
• Fill out the High-level of proposed solution section
• Email [email protected] again with links to the doc and pre-design conversation in Slack
• Add the DesignDocReview label to get the High-level of proposed solution section reviewed
• Respond to any questions or concerns and bring up blockers in Slack to get a consensus if necessary
• Confirm that the doc has the minimum necessary number of reviews before proceeding
• Host another pre-design meeting in #expensify-open-source to ask for engineering feedback on the technical solution.
• Fill out the Detailed implementation of the solution and related sections.
• Re-add the DesignDocReview label to this issue
• Respond to any questions or concerns and bring up blockers in Slack to get consensus if necessary
• Confirm that the doc has the minimum necessary number of reviews before proceeding
• Email [email protected] one last time to let them know the Design Doc is moving into the implementation phase
• Implement the changes
• Add regression tests so that QA can test your feature with every deploy (instructions)
• Send out a follow up email to [email protected] once everything has been implemented and do a Project Wrap-Up retrospective that provides:
  • Summary of what we accomplished with this project
  • What went well?
  • What could we have done better?
  • What did we learn?

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @JmillsExpensify

[Julesssss]

After discussion here, I want to make the document changes much clearer before seeking help from SWM.

[trjExpensify]

I think this is going in #wave-control, right @JmillsExpensify?

[zsgreenwald]

Back from OOO, @Julesssss am I needed anywhere in particular to keep this moving?

[Julesssss]

Hey, it would be helpful to resolve this comment threads, but other than that no, I'll try to hand over the doc to SWM this week.

[Julesssss]

@zsgreenwald actually if you had a chance to check the high-level document again today that would be helpful. I tried to update any section that mentioned the old UI (Avatar instead of Name, etc), but there's a chance I might have missed something.

Then we should be able to open the project up to SWM tomorrow 🤞

[Julesssss]

The design document for this project is now ready for the external teams to make a start on.

myself and @zsgreenwald will be available for any concerns or questions you have while we work on this project. I have added document comments in places that I think are outdated or need changes. Please feel free to resolve these as you work through the document. And to create new comments with any questions you have for us!

Plan should be for the SWM team:

• Read the high-level section for background on the project
• Review, update and improve the detailed section of the document. Paying attention to:
  • Design changes, mainly the switch from Attendee Pills to a Text list of attendees (screenshots below)
  • Codebase changes and refactors since November which make some document details irrelevant/outdated
• Submit the proposed detailed changes for another round of internal feedback
• Start work on the feature, while I handle the back-end changes

---

Previous Design

Updated Design

[filip-solecki]

Hi! I am Filip from SWM and I'd like to work on this issue!

[zfurtak]

Hello, I'm Zuza from SWM and I'd like to work on this issue with Filip :)

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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 9.1.40-7 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Track Expense - Polish #60067

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2025-05-14. 🎊

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

• @zfurtak does not require payment (Contractor)
• @filip-solecki does not require payment (Contractor)

[melvin-bot]

BugZero Checklist: The PR adding this new feature has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed:

• [@zfurtak / @filip-solecki] Please propose regression test steps to ensure the new feature will work correctly on production in further releases.
• [@JmillsExpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon.

[JmillsExpensify]

No assigned users require payment, but I also don't think we're ready to close yet as this initiative is not yet done.

[melvin-bot]

Skipping the payment summary for this issue since all the assignees are employees or vendors. If this is incorrect, please manually add the payment summary SO.

[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.

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.1.45-21 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• [Attendees Tracking] - More follow up issues #61484

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2025-05-22. 🎊

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

• @zfurtak does not require payment (Contractor)
• @filip-solecki does not require payment (Contractor)

[melvin-bot]

BugZero Checklist: The PR adding this new feature has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed:

• [@zfurtak / @filip-solecki] Please propose regression test steps to ensure the new feature will work correctly on production in further releases.
• [@JmillsExpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon.

[melvin-bot]

Skipping the payment summary for this issue since all the assignees are employees or vendors. If this is incorrect, please manually add the payment summary SO.