[$500] Android - Deeplink navigation does not work for RHN links.

[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:

Action Performed:

1. Open the app on Android.
2. Log out if already logined.
3. Use deeplink new-expensify://settings/profile/personal-details/date-of-birth. Please use the domain/scheme that works for you. you can also use staging url if testing staging app.
4. Now, login with a user.
5. Notice that user is not taken to deeplink page.

Expected Result:

Deeplink for RHN should take the user to that page after login.

Actual Result:

RHN deeplinks does not open after sign in when opened while user is log out.

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: 1.3.67.2
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.2023-09-07.at.3.18.54.PM.mov

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @parasharrajat
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1694080489810799

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01f1e03cd76963690d
• Upwork Job ID: 1701262065942163456
• Last Price Increase: 2024-03-18

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01f1e03cd76963690d

[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

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @michaelhaxhiu (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 - @narefyev91 (External)

[melvin-bot]

📣 @sminrana! 📣
Hey, it seems we don’t have your contributor details yet! You'll only have to do this once, and this is how we'll hire you on Upwork.
Please follow these steps:

1. Get the email address used to login to your Expensify account. If you don't already have an Expensify account, create one here. If you have multiple accounts (e.g. one for testing), please use your main account email.
2. Get the link to your Upwork profile. It's necessary because we only pay via Upwork. You can access it by logging in, and then clicking on your name. It'll look like this. If you don't already have an account, sign up for one here.
3. Copy the format below and paste it in a comment on this issue. Replace the placeholder text with your actual details.
   
   Format:

Contributor details
Your Expensify account email: <REPLACE EMAIL HERE>
Upwork Profile Link: <REPLACE LINK HERE>

[abekkala]

on hold

[hungvu193]

hey why is this on hold? @abekkala

[melvin-bot]

@abekkala, @narefyev91 Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

[abekkala]

Not overdue. On Hold

[abekkala]

@hungvu193
#26021 (comment)

#26021 (comment)

[hungvu193]

@hungvu193

#26021 (comment)

#26021 (comment)

I think other issues are being on hold because of this issue 😂 there's misunderstanding here

[abekkala]

Ah the others should be on hold in favor of this one?
The other issue was created before this one, what is the reasoning to Hold the older one and keep this one to move forward?

[hungvu193]

Ah the others should be on hold in favor of this one?

Exactly. Other issues need deeplinks work as expected to test their proposal so this issue need to be solved in order to move forward with other issues.

[abekkala]

@mallenexpensify ah ok, I probably misunderstood the comment above. I was thinking that @thienlnam comment insinuated that once the PR merged for the fix for #33205 and #33001 it could be used for #31316 which would then resolve this one.

I was thinking after PR merge I'd just re-test weekly on this one to see if it needed to proceed

[mallenexpensify]

Thanks @abekkala , it looks like all the above are closed/merged. If you want Applause to test, I'd either add the retest-weekly label or drop in #qa and ask them to test (and tag folks bookmarked at top).

[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]

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

[abekkala]

@kbecciv can you give me a status on the retest?

[mvtglobally]

Issue is reproducible during KI retests with a slightly different behavior

1709408381407.dob.mp4

[abekkala]

@mvtglobally If there is now different behavior from the OP
can you provide a new:

• Action Performed:
• Expected Result:
• Actual Result:

[melvin-bot]

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

[shubham1206agra]

Since @narefyev91 is no longer C+, let me help this to move along as C+.

@mvtglobally Can you answer @abekkala's question?

[shubham1206agra]

Steps:

1. Open the app on Android.
2. Log out if already logged in.
3. Use deeplink new-expensify://settings/profile/date-of-birth. Please use the domain/scheme that works for you. you can also use staging url if testing staging app.
4. Now, login with a user.
5. Notice that user is not taken to the correct deeplink page.

Expected Result:
The user should be taken to the date of birth page.

Actual Result:
The user is taken to the legal name page instead.

@mvtglobally Can you confirm these?

[shubham1206agra]

And I am not able to repro this at all? I am getting redirected to the correct page.

[abekkala]

@shubham1206agra the retest weekly label was applied to see if the reported issue was still occurring. If you're not able to reproduce then we can close.

[mallenexpensify]

Thanks @shubham1206agra for reviewing some of these stuck issues and helping to get some closed and.. hopefully fixed!

[parasharrajat]

@abekkala This should be eligible for a reporting bonus. Could you post a summary about that?

[mallenexpensify]

@parasharrajat , what's the reasoning for paying the reporting bonus here?

[parasharrajat]

@mallenexpensify This was reported by me back in when reporting bonus was active so I thought I might be eligible.

[abekkala]

@mallenexpensify wouldn't a reporting bonus only be paid for an issue that actually implemented a fix?

[melvin-bot]

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

[mallenexpensify]

Yeah, that's what I was assuming too @abekkala, based off this in CONTRIBUTING.md

Payment for your contributions will be made no less than 7 days after the pull request is deployed to production

I know CONTRIBUTING.md has been updated to remove details on the reporting bounty but my memory is that we always stated the bug had to be fixed in order to be paid.

[parasharrajat]

I thought some work had been done on this issue as the summary was posted twice in the past. Also, It must be fixed with some PR or refactoring as it was reproducible a few days back. As the contributor and C+ both(agency members) must have been paid for the time spent, this might also be eligible for reporting.

Anyways, thanks for the clarification, I am fine with any directions. Let's close the issue afterward.

Thank you.

[abekkala]

This one does not qualify for a reporting payout of $50 given the report did not result in a PR being created and deployed for a fix