[Due for payment 2025-03-21] [$250] Reports - Bottom tab appears twice in offline mode

[lanitochka17]

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: 9.1.10-0
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: N
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: N/A
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): [email protected]
**Issue reported by:**Applause - Internal Team

Action Performed:

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Go offline
3. Go to Reports

Expected Result:

• Bottom tab will not appear twice
• Offline indicator is at the bottom of the central pane

Actual Result:

• Bottom tab appears twice
• Offline indicator is not at the bottom of the central pane

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

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

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6763446_1741305436775.20250307_075636.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021897868648488208623
• Upwork Job ID: 1897868648488208623
• Last Price Increase: 2025-03-07
• Automatic offers:
• daledah | Contributor | 106422245

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @allroundexperts

[melvin-bot]

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

[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.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021897868648488208623

[melvin-bot]

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

[daledah]

Proposal

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

Bottom tab appears twice
Offline indicator is not at the bottom of the central pane

What is the root cause of that problem?

In Search Page we display two offline indicators:

App/src/pages/Search/SearchPage.tsx

Line 66 in fb79730

shouldShowOfflineIndicatorInWideScreen

App/src/pages/Search/SearchPage.tsx

Line 106 in fb79730

shouldShowOfflineIndicatorInWideScreen

The top one causes all contents inside to shift up by 25px, causing this bottom top bar to shift up and appear from view:

App/src/pages/Search/SearchPage.tsx

Line 102 in fb79730

<BottomTabBar selectedTab={BOTTOM_TABS.SEARCH} />

It also causes the bottom indicator to shift up as well:

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

We should remove this line:

App/src/pages/Search/SearchPage.tsx

Lines 66 to 67 in fb79730

	shouldShowOfflineIndicatorInWideScreen
	offlineIndicatorStyle={styles.mtAuto}

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

None

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Reminder: Please use plain English, be brief and avoid jargon. Feel free to use images, charts or pseudo-code if necessary. Do not post large multi-line diffs or write walls of text. Do not create PRs unless you have been hired for this job.

[allroundexperts]

@daledah This is a deploy blocker. Can you please point out the PR which caused this?

[daledah]

@allroundexperts Here's the offending PR.

[allroundexperts]

Thanks @daledah. @daledah's proposal looks good to me. The RCA is correct, and the proposed solution works as well.

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @robertjchen is eligible for the choreEngineerContributorManagement assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[robertjchen]

thanks for the review, all yours @daledah

[melvin-bot]

📣 @daledah 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job
Please accept the offer and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[daledah]

@allroundexperts PR is ready.

[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 9.1.12-7 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: remove duplicate offline indicator in Search page #57999

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2025-03-21. 🎊

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

• @allroundexperts requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @daledah requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)

[melvin-bot]

Issue is ready for payment but no BZ is assigned. @twisterdotcom you are the lucky winner! Please verify the payment summary looks correct and complete the checklist. Thanks!

[allroundexperts]

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/57607/files#r2009258502

• [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

Precondition:

• N/A

Test:

1. Go offline
2. Go to Reports

Verify that the bottom tab will not appear twice and offline indicator is at the bottom of the central pane

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[twisterdotcom]

I think was skip the test here tbh.

[twisterdotcom]

Payment Summary:

• @allroundexperts paid $250 via NewDot Manual Request
• @daledah paid $250 here (Contributor)