[HOLD for payment 2025-02-06] [$250] Expense - Hold option is missing in the context menu

[mitarachim]

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: 9.0.90-0
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: No
If this was caught on HybridApp, is this reproducible on New Expensify Standalone?: N/A
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: Exp
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): [email protected]
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Device used: Mac 15.0 / Chrome
App Component: Money Requests

Action Performed:

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Go to workspace chat.
3. Submit two expenses to the workspace chat.
4. Go to expense report.
5. Click on the expense preview.
6. Go back to the expense report.
7. Right click on the expense preview.

Expected Result:

There should be Hold option in the context menu (production behavior).

Actual Result:

Hold option is missing in the context menu.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

• Android: Standalone
• Android: HybridApp
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Standalone
• iOS: HybridApp
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Bug6725676_1738031730142.20250128_100124.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021884172494858147022
• Upwork Job ID: 1884172494858147022
• Last Price Increase: 2025-01-28

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @mallenexpensify

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @mallenexpensify (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.

[melvin-bot]

💬 A slack conversation has been started in #expensify-open-source

[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.

[techievivek]

Could be related to this? #55536

[techievivek]

Hmm, but I am not seeing any obvious change in that PR that could have caused this.

[techievivek]

@kubabutkiewicz @paultsimura can you please take a look at this GH and see if it could be related to the above PR?

[kubabutkiewicz]

Sure will take a look

[paultsimura]

I've reverted our PR locally and the issue is still reproducible

[kubabutkiewicz]

@techievivek I reverted the PR and this is still reproducable

[techievivek]

Oops, false alarm then I guess. Thanks for taking a look.

[paultsimura]

I found a fix.
Here, we've accidentally started using ReportUtilsIsMoneyRequestReport instead of ReportUtilsIsMoneyRequest.

App/src/pages/home/report/ContextMenu/BaseReportActionContextMenu.tsx

Line 193 in 1ab69c3

const isMoneyRequest = useMemo(() => ReportUtilsIsMoneyRequestReport(childReport), [childReport]);

Changing it back fixes the issue:

Offending PR: #55697
I can prepare a fix if needed.

[techievivek]

Good catch, not sure why methods are named like that, it is easy to make that sort of mistake. Can you please raised the PR, I can quickly review it. Thanks.

[paultsimura]

Yes, will be ready soon👍

[techievivek]

Also, removing the blocker label since user can still put the request on HOLD and it should be fine to get this fixed via normal deploy.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021884172494858147022

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @paultsimura is eligible for the External assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[paultsimura]

@techievivek ready for review: #55847

[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 9.0.91-2 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: Use ReportUtilsIsMoneyRequest, not ReportUtilsIsMoneyRequestReport #55847

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2025-02-06. 🎊

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

• @paultsimura requires payment (Needs manual offer from BZ)

[melvin-bot]

@paultsimura @mallenexpensify @paultsimura The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed. Please copy/paste the BugZero Checklist from here into a new comment on this GH and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[melvin-bot]

Payment Summary

Upwork Job

• ROLE: @paultsimura paid $(AMOUNT) via Upwork (LINK)

BugZero Checklist (@mallenexpensify)

• I have verified the correct assignees and roles are listed above and updated the neccesary manual offers
• I have verified that there are no duplicate or incorrect contracts on Upwork for this job (https://www.upwork.com/ab/applicants/1884172494858147022/hired)
• I have paid out the Upwork contracts or cancelled the ones that are incorrect
• I have verified the payment summary above is correct

[mallenexpensify]

@paultsimura can you please accept the job and reply here once you have?
https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021884172494858147022

[paultsimura]

Thanks @mallenexpensify, accepted

[melvin-bot]

@paultsimura, @mallenexpensify, @techievivek Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[mallenexpensify]

Contributor+: @paultsimura paid $250 via Newdot

@paultsimura can you fill out the BZ checklist plz? Thx

[paultsimura]

BugZero Checklist:

• [Contributor] Classify the bug:

Bug classification

Source of bug:

• 1a. Result of the original design (eg. a case wasn't considered)
• 1b. Mistake during implementation
• 1c. Backend bug
• 1z. Other:

Where bug was reported:

• 2a. Reported on production (eg. bug slipped through the normal regression and PR testing process on staging)
• 2b. Reported on staging (eg. found during regression or PR testing)
• 2d. Reported on a PR
• 2z. Other:

Who reported the bug:

• 3a. Expensify user
• 3b. Expensify employee
• 3c. Contributor
• 3d. QA
• 3z. Other:

• [Contributor] 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: https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/55697/files#r1950765613

• [Contributor] If the regression was CRITICAL (e.g. interrupts a core flow) A discussion in #expensify-open-source 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

• [Contributor] If it was decided to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps using the template below to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.

• [BugZero Assignee] Create a GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon.

  Link to issue:

Regression Test Proposal

Not needed as this was caught on staging while executing an existing regression test.

[mallenexpensify]

Thanks @paultsimura !