[HOLD for payment 2023-09-29] [$500] Web - 2 requests appears for few seconds on click of pay elsewhere button

[kbecciv]

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 chat with userB
2. Click on + icon and select request money option
3. Enter amount and click on request button
4. From userB, click on pay elsewhere button

Expected Result:

It should not show 2 requests

Actual Result:

Requests appears for few seconds on click of pay elsewhere button

Workaround:

Unknown

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: 1.3.63.0
Reproducible in staging?: y
Reproducible in production?: n
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.2023-09-05.at.12.28.39.PM.mov

Recording.4267.mp4

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @gadhiyamanan
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1693897414969169

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01ef8c662a1041de0d
• Upwork Job ID: 1699362909149663232
• Last Price Increase: 2023-09-13
• Automatic offers:
• s-alves10 | Contributor | 26670765
• gadhiyamanan | Reporter | 26670766

[OSBotify]

👋 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]

Triggered auto assignment to @danieldoglas (Engineering), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4319 for more details.

[danieldoglas]

I don't think this is a deploy blocker. cc @mountiny @luacmartins, what do you think?

[mountiny]

@gadhiyamanan whats the 50units request in the LHN, that should not be there? How did it happen to show up?

I agree not a blocker

[s-alves10]

Proposal

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

2 requests appears for a few seconds on click pay-elsewhere button

What is the root cause of that problem?

This is a regression of this PR

When we pay the money request, payMoneyRequest function is called

In getPayMoneyRequestParams in this function, we get optimistic report preview action from ReportUtils.updateReportPreview

As you can see below, this function increases the childMoneyRequestCount by one as if we create a new money request

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.js

Line 2284 in b9c4832

childMoneyRequestCount: reportPreviewAction.childMoneyRequestCount + 1,

This is the root cause

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

We should not increase the childMoneyRequestCount of report preview action for pay request.

1. Add the parameter named requestIncrease to the updateReportPreview function

function updateReportPreview(iouReport, reportPreviewAction, requestIncrease = 1, comment = '', transaction = undefined) {
    ... ...
        childMoneyRequestCount: reportPreviewAction.childMoneyRequestCount + requestIncrease,
}

2. Add this parameter to all the function call
   

   App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

   Line 451 in b9c4832

   reportPreviewAction = ReportUtils.updateReportPreview(iouReport, reportPreviewAction, comment, optimisticTransaction);

        reportPreviewAction = ReportUtils.updateReportPreview(iouReport, reportPreviewAction, 1, comment, optimisticTransaction);

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

Line 1536 in b9c4832

const optimisticReportPreviewAction = ReportUtils.updateReportPreview(iouReport, ReportActionsUtils.getReportPreviewAction(chatReport.reportID, iouReport.reportID));

    const optimisticReportPreviewAction = ReportUtils.updateReportPreview(iouReport, ReportActionsUtils.getReportPreviewAction(chatReport.reportID, iouReport.reportID), 0);

This works as expected

Result

26767.mp4

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

We can remove the childMoneyRequestCount increasing code from the updateReportPreview function and do this action at the calling function

[gadhiyamanan]

@mountiny message appears even if only one money requested
https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/54790231/7f3206ca-7d97-4176-bc7c-8efdd632b03d

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01ef8c662a1041de0d

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @mallenexpensify (External), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/8582 for more details.

[melvin-bot]

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

[eVoloshchak]

Reviewing this today, apologies for the delay

[eVoloshchak]

I agree with @s-alves10's assessment of the root cause
Instead of adding a requestIncrease param that is a number, I think we can add a boolean instead. There isn't a case where we need to increase the request count by 2 or more, so having a boolean would be more readable
But that can be ironed out during the PR stage, the general direction of the proposal looks good to me

🎀👀🎀 C+ reviewed!

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[melvin-bot]

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

Offer link
Upwork job

[s-alves10]

@eVoloshchak

PR is ready for review

[melvin-bot]

🎯 ⚡️ Woah @eVoloshchak / @s-alves10, great job pushing this forwards! ⚡️

The pull request got merged within 3 working days of assignment, so this job is eligible for a 50% #urgency bonus 🎉

• when @s-alves10 got assigned: 2023-09-14 09:58:46 Z
• when the PR got merged: 2023-09-19 01:50:05 UTC

On to the next one 🚀

[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 1.3.72-11 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: not increase request count for pay request #27435

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-09-29. 🎊

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:

• @eVoloshchak does not require payment (Eligible for Manual Requests)
• @s-alves10 requires payment offer (Contributor)
• @gadhiyamanan requires payment offer (Reporter)

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

[mallenexpensify]

@gadhiyamanan and @s-alves10 , can you please accept the job and reply here once you have?
https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01ef8c662a1041de0d

@eVoloshchak plz fill out the checklst steps, not sure why it didn't auto-post here

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:

• The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• 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:
• 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:
• Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• 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.
• [@mallenexpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[gadhiyamanan]

@mallenexpensify applied, thanks!

[s-alves10]

@mallenexpensify
Accepted the offer. Thanks

[eVoloshchak]

This is a regression of #26603

@s-alves10, could you elaborate on this more, please? I'm not too sure this is the PR that caused this, I think it was #23651, but would appreciate it if you expand on why you think it was #26603

[s-alves10]

@eVoloshchak

Yes, you're right. I was wrong

[eVoloshchak]

• The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: Show comment/requests in report preview #23651
• 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/23651/files#r1342685354ё
• 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: I don't think an additional discussion is needed, there isn't much we could do besides automated testing
• Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
  Is it easy to test for this bug? Yes
  Is the bug related to an important user flow? Yes
  Is it an impactful bug? No
  This isn't very impactful, but it's related to core functionality and fairly easy to test, so I think regression test is worth adding

[eVoloshchak]

Regression Test Proposal

1. Open the App and log in with any account (user A)
2. Go to chat with user B
3. Send a money request to user B
4. From user B, click on Pay elsewhere
5. Verify that there is only one request, a second request doesn't appear for a brief period of time

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[mallenexpensify]

Issue reporter: @gadhiyamanan paid $50 via Upwork
Contributor: @s-alves10 paid $750 via Upwork, includes urgency bonus
Contributor+: @eVoloshchak is due $750 via NewDot

Thanks @eVoloshchak for test steps - https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/322548

[eVoloshchak]

Requested the payment via NewDot
I did that a couple of days ago, but can't see the payment request after signing out and signing back in, so re-requesting.
Please verify there isn't a duplicate payment request

[JmillsExpensify]

$750 payment approved for @eVoloshchak based on BZ summary.