[HOLD for payment 2023-08-01] [$1000] User was not shown on Invite members page after immediately inviting

[kavimuru]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Action Performed:

1. Go to workspace invite member page -> Invite
2. Type a new user whom you have not interacted yet
3. Invite them
4. Observe invite member page

Expected Result:

The invited user should immediately show up in the invite member page

Actual Result:

The invited user shows up after sometime

Workaround:

Can the user still use Expensify without this being fixed? Have you informed them of the workaround?

Platforms:

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

• Android / native
• Android / Chrome
• iOS / native
• iOS / Safari
• MacOS / Chrome / Safari
• MacOS / Desktop

Version Number: 1.3.38-3
Reproducible in staging?: y
Reproducible in production?: y
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
Notes/Photos/Videos: Any additional supporting documentation

Screen.Recording.2023-07-08.at.12.15.02.AM.mov

Recording.1213.mp4

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @abdulrahuman5196
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1688755739075519

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0101aca3aeff5e6e57
• Upwork Job ID: 1678399914954649600
• Last Price Increase: 2023-07-10

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Bug0 Triage Checklist (Main S/O)

• This "bug" occurs on a supported platform (ensure Platforms in OP are ✅)
• This bug is not a duplicate report (check E/App issues and #expensify-bugs)
  • If it is, comment with a link to the original report, close the issue and add any novel details to the original issue instead
• This bug is reproducible using the reproduction steps in the OP. S/O
  • If the reproduction steps are clear and you're unable to reproduce the bug, check with the reporter and QA first, then close the issue.
  • If the reproduction steps aren't clear and you determine the correct steps, please update the OP.
• This issue is filled out as thoroughly and clearly as possible
  • Pay special attention to the title, results, platforms where the bug occurs, and if the bug happens on staging/production.
• I have reviewed and subscribed to the linked Slack conversation to ensure Slack/Github stay in sync

[samh-nl]

Proposal

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

Inviting users you have not interacted with to a workspace do not immediately show.

What is the root cause of that problem?

When inviting members, the ONYXKEYS.PERSONAL_DETAILS_LIST data is not optimistically set for users where no prior interaction has taken place.

App/src/libs/actions/Policy.js

Lines 362 to 371 in 60f4817

	const optimisticData = [
	{
	onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
	key: membersListKey,
	// Convert to object with each key containing {pendingAction: ‘add’}
	value: _.object(accountIDs, Array(accountIDs.length).fill({pendingAction: CONST.RED_BRICK_ROAD_PENDING_ACTION.ADD})),
	},
	...membersChats.onyxOptimisticData,
	];

This leads to the members not being rendered and an error being logged.

App/src/pages/workspace/WorkspaceMembersPage.js

Lines 371 to 375 in 60f4817

	const details = props.personalDetails[accountID];
	if (!details) {
	Log.hmmm(`[WorkspaceMembersPage] no personal details found for policy member with accountID: ${accountID}`);
	return;
	}

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

In Policy.addMembersToWorkspace(), the optimistically set data must include ONYXKEYS.PERSONAL_DETAILS_LIST information for users for whom it does not exist.

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0101aca3aeff5e6e57

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @s77rt (External)

[maddylewis]

C+ assigned to review existing proposal

[s77rt]

@samh-nl Thanks for the proposal. Your RCA is correct. The solution makes sense.

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @yuwenmemon, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @s77rt 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Reviewer role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Upwork job

[melvin-bot]

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

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 📖

[melvin-bot]

📣 @abdulrahuman5196 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Reporter role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Upwork job

[yuwenmemon]

@samh-nl let us know when you have a PR!

[samh-nl]

Just an update - PR is almost done. There was an issue leading to duplicate members showing when optimistically adding them (with the other user being provided by the backend). My solution is to remove the optimistically added user upon success.

[maddylewis]

@yuwenmemon is reviewing here - #22904 (comment)

[s77rt]

PR is merged

[melvin-bot]

@yuwenmemon @s77rt @maddylewis @samh-nl this issue was created 2 weeks ago. Are we close to approving a proposal? If not, what's blocking us from getting this issue assigned? Don't hesitate to create a thread in #expensify-open-source to align faster in real time. Thanks!

[s77rt]

PR is merged already, Melvin

[maddylewis]

PR is merged / awaiting regression period before issuing payment 👍

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.3.44-2 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: optimistically add personal details #22904

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-08-01. 🎊

After the hold period is over and BZ checklist items are completed, please complete any of the applicable payments for this issue, and check them off once done.

• External issue reporter
• Contributor that fixed the issue
• Contributor+ that helped on the issue and/or PR

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

• @s77rt requires payment
• @samh-nl requires payment

As a reminder, here are the bonuses/penalties that should be applied for any External issue:

• Merged PR within 3 business days of assignment - 50% bonus
• Merged PR more than 9 business days after assignment - 50% penalty

[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.
• [@maddylewis] 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: Policy members keyed by accountID #20397
• The offending PR has been commented on: Policy members keyed by accountID #20397 (comment)
• A discussion in #expensify-bugs has been started: I don't think this is needed here
• Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug: No. We have this test that should cover it already https://expensify.testrail.io/index.php?/cases/view/2645400

[maddylewis]

moving to daily since payments are due early next week

[maddylewis]

Payments:

• abdulrahuman5196 - $250 (reporting)
• @s77rt - $1000 (C+)
• @samh-nl - $1000 (contributor)

---

• Contributor hired July 10
• PR merged July 19

[maddylewis]

everyone is paid - closing!