[HOLD for payment 2024-07-22] [HOLD for payment 2024-07-17] [Collect approvers] [$500] Expense - Owner of submission message changes from admin to employee when admin submits it

[lanitochka17]

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

---

Version Number: 1.4.32-2
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
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team
Slack conversation:

Action Performed:

1. [Employee] Go to workspace chat
2. [Employee] Create a manual request and do not submit it
3. [Admin] Go to the workspace chat with employee
4. [Admin] Go to expense report
5. [Admin] Click Submit

Expected Result:

The report submission message "You (on behalf of employee) submitted this report to you" is owned by the admin

Actual Result:

The report submission message "You (on behalf of employee) submitted this report to you" is owned by the admin first, then it quickly changes to become owned by the employee, when the message indicates "You" which means the admin

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

• Android: Native
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Native
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6356005_1706287888756.bandicam_2024-01-24_21-27-41-417.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01b83478ffce02da03
• Upwork Job ID: 1750959089237659648
• Last Price Increase: 2024-01-26

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @slafortune

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01b83478ffce02da03

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

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

[lanitochka17]

We think that this bug might be related to #6.
CC @greg-schroeder

[greg-schroeder]

I think probably Wave 8 as it seems mostly like an admin-side bug

[melvin-bot]

@slafortune, @parasharrajat Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[rezkiy37]

Hi, I’m Michael (Mykhailo) from Callstack and I would like to work on this issue.

[slafortune]

Assigned you @rezkiy37

[rezkiy37]

So, I've investigated the bug. I can confirm that it still exists. I can say that it is a backend bug. The root cause that the backend attaches an incorrect actorAccountID to a submit action item. The app optimistically attaches a current (admin - 14859714) user actorAccountID, but the backend responses with another value (employee - 16218756). Looks like a request it correct:

Response:

Video:

Bug.mp4

[rezkiy37]

@slafortune and @parasharrajat, please take a look at a comment above.

[zanyrenney]

@slafortune I commented in Slack, but there seems more like collect approvers/wave seven. If you disagree, let me know!

[RachCHopkins]

This may be the same as #33819

Edit: No it is not, it just comes from a similar underlying behaviour.

Per @trjExpensify:

I don’t think we want to be recomputing and displaying that OldDot system message

The sys message should come “from” the admin that clicked Submit and read:

submitted %amount%

[melvin-bot]

@slafortune, @parasharrajat, @rezkiy37 Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[rezkiy37]

@rezkiy37 are you able to get back at this now pending the mentioned PR?

We already merged a PR for the App. (#35263 (comment))

[marcochavezf]

Backend PRs to fix remaining issues are in review #41040 (comment)

[parasharrajat]

PR is waiting on changes.

[slafortune]

I will be on vacation until June 4th, but I will not get another BZ assigned since no payment will need to be handled via Upworks.

It looks like we are still waiting on a PR. @marcochavezf, if something changes and you need a BZ member, please reply to the label.

@rezkiy37 is an expert contributor and is not due payment here
@parasharrajat will be paid $500 via New Dot for the C+ role

[melvin-bot]

This issue has not been updated in over 15 days. @marcochavezf, @slafortune, @parasharrajat, @rezkiy37 eroding to Monthly issue.

P.S. Is everyone reading this sure this is really a near-term priority? Be brave: if you disagree, go ahead and close it out. If someone disagrees, they'll reopen it, and if they don't: one less thing to do!

[parasharrajat]

This is waiting on @marcochavezf

[slafortune]

Still waiting on @marcochavezf

One of the backend PRs has been merged, I will post an update here once the remaining ones have been deployed. Meanwhile I will fix the conflicts

[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 9.0.5-13 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Display submitted message in report action #41040

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-07-17. 🎊

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

• @parasharrajat requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @rezkiy37 does not require payment (Contractor)

[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:

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

[parasharrajat]

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:

• [@parasharrajat] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: Its a new change.
• [@parasharrajat] 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: NA
• [@parasharrajat] 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: Not needed
• [@parasharrajat] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug. Yes
• [@parasharrajat] 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.

Regression Test Steps

1. Create a workspace and invite a member
2. Enable Delay submissions and set the frequency to Daily
3. Enable Add approvals.
4. [Member] Create a few expenses but don't submit them
5. [Admin] Submit the expense report
6. Verify the message submitted %amount% is displayed in both accounts

Do you agree 👍 or 👎 ?

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.0.6-8 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Display submitted message in report action #41040

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-07-22. 🎊

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

• @parasharrajat requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @rezkiy37 does not require payment (Contractor)

[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:

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

[slafortune]

@rezkiy37 is an expert contributor and not due payment here.
@parasharrajat Role C+ is due $500 via NewDot

[parasharrajat]

Payment requested as per #35263 (comment)

[JmillsExpensify]

$500 approved for @parasharrajat