AU - Chat - Deleted message with a thread disappears from chat

[jponikarchuk]

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: v9.1.46-0
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: No
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: https://expensify.testrail.io/index.php?/tests/view/6122620
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): [email protected]
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Device used: Windows 10, iPhone 13/iOS 18.4.1
App Component: Chat Report View

Action Performed:

1. Navigate to any conversation
2. Send any message
3. Reply in thread and add a comment
4. Navigate back to DM and delete the parent message

Expected Result:

The parent message is now displayed as [Deleted message]

Actual Result:

The message disappears from the chat

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

• Android: App
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: App
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• iOS: mWeb Chrome
• Windows: Chrome
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

1.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @RachCHopkins (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.

[gijoe0295]

Offending PR: #62002 and #62151

This is quite a weird one. I think the diff shown in #62002 is not correct and eventually cause the revert PR not to restore to the correct state on main before.

My guess is because of these force pushes so Github displays the wrong diff.

So in short, the correct revert should be:

App/src/pages/home/ReportScreen.tsx

Lines 269 to 276 in 41108ae

	const {
	reportActions: reportActionsWithDeletedExpenses,
	linkedAction,
	sortedAllReportActions,
	hasNewerActions,
	hasOlderActions,
	} = usePaginatedReportActions(reportID, reportActionIDFromRoute);
	const reportActions = reportActionsWithDeletedExpenses.filter((value) => !isDeletedParentAction(value));

const {reportActions, linkedAction, sortedAllReportActions, hasNewerActions, hasOlderActions} = usePaginatedReportActions(reportID, reportActionIDFromRoute);

You can verify that by tracing back Blame in ReportScreen file.

cc @JakubKorytko @mountiny @aldo-expensify because you worked on the revert.

[JakubKorytko]

My guess is that the problem with the revert was probably not caused by the force push, but rather by the fact that two PRs were merged very close together: #61777 and #62002. They both changed the same line just below usePaginatedReportActions, so a conflict occurred that needed to be resolved. That is why the diff may be incorrect. I think only #62002 is the problem here and it should be reverted but we should keep the functionality added by #61777.

[aldo-expensify]

but we should keep the functionality added by #61777.

I think I'm missing something, I see that the lines in the current staging and main:

App/src/pages/home/ReportScreen.tsx

Lines 269 to 276 in dc23284

	const {
	reportActions: reportActionsWithDeletedExpenses,
	linkedAction,
	sortedAllReportActions,
	hasNewerActions,
	hasOlderActions,
	} = usePaginatedReportActions(reportID, reportActionIDFromRoute);
	const reportActions = reportActionsWithDeletedExpenses.filter((value) => !isDeletedParentAction(value));

are the same the PR #61777 changed to:

https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/61777/files#diff-68b13bc8344820144538408415f307efee198ccc63977ba318c4234102ec3917L269-R276

Can you help me see what is the line that is wrong after the revert? 🙇

[JakubKorytko]

Can you help me see what is the line that is wrong after the revert? 🙇

Actually, I think my approach to filtering these actions was incorrect. Feel free to remove this line if it fixes the issue and I think there's another file with the same logic for filtering actions - so that should also be considered. However, please don't revert the entire #61777 because more changes were made than just this one.

I will reconsider this on Monday and prepare a follow-up for these two PRs (#61777 & reverted #62002) because removing this line will most likely reopen two linked issues in the PR. The important thing is deciding which issue is more important to fix, because either way, I will start working on a follow-up on Monday to correct these two bad boys.