[HOLD for payment 2024-04-25] [$500] IOU - Missing green checkmark next to Total amount after paying request offline

[izarutskaya]

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: 1.4.58-4
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: N
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: https://expensify.testrail.io/index.php?/tests/view/4465715
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Issue reported by: Applause-Internal team

Action Performed:

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Go to any DM where there is unsettled IOU.
3. Click on the IOU preview.
4. Go offline.
5. Click Pay elsewehre.

Expected Result:

A green checkmark will be present next to Total amount after paying the amount (production behavior).

Actual Result:

Green checkmark is not present next to Total amount after paying the amount, but the checkmark is present in IOU preview.

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

Bug6434183_1711974777973.bandicam_2024-04-01_20-28-41-567.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01f5527691d839335a
• Upwork Job ID: 1775053032402595840
• Last Price Increase: 2024-04-02
• Automatic offers:
• alitoshmatov | Reviewer | 0
• bernhardoj | Contributor | 0

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

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

[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.

[izarutskaya]

@johncschuster I haven't added the External label as I wasn't 100% sure about this issue. Please take a look and add the label if you agree it's a bug and can be handled by external contributors.

[izarutskaya]

We think this issue might be related to the #collect project.

[izarutskaya]

Production

bandicam.2024-04-01.20-33-07-003.mp4

[marcaaron]

@lakchote is offline. This looks to me to be pretty minor so I am removing the blocker.

[bernhardoj]

Proposal

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

The green check mark next to total amount doesn't show after paying a money request.

What is the root cause of that problem?

The condition for the check mark to show is that the request is settled and not partially paid.

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyReportView.tsx

Lines 113 to 120 in a4d01a8

	{isSettled && !isPartiallyPaid && (
	<View style={[styles.defaultCheckmarkWrapper, styles.mh2]}>
	<Icon
	src={Expensicons.Checkmark}
	fill={theme.success}
	/>
	</View>
	)}

The partial paid condition checks for the pending fields of partial,

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyReportView.tsx

Line 51 in a4d01a8

const isPartiallyPaid = Boolean(report?.pendingFields?.partial);

which is added conditionally whether the pay is full or not.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Line 4433 in a4d01a8

partial: full ? null : CONST.RED_BRICK_ROAD_PENDING_ACTION.UPDATE,

However, we always pass full as false when paying a request,

App/src/components/MoneyReportHeader.tsx

Lines 93 to 97 in a4d01a8

	if (ReportUtils.hasHeldExpenses(moneyRequestReport.reportID)) {
	setIsHoldMenuVisible(true);
	} else if (chatReport) {
	IOU.payMoneyRequest(type, chatReport, moneyRequestReport, false);
	}

even though we are paying the full amount (no hold request).

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

Pass the full param as true, or leave it empty because the default value is true, just like we did for approval.

App/src/components/MoneyReportHeader.tsx

Lines 100 to 107 in a4d01a8

	const confirmApproval = () => {
	setRequestType('approve');
	if (ReportUtils.hasHeldExpenses(moneyRequestReport.reportID)) {
	setIsHoldMenuVisible(true);
	} else {
	IOU.approveMoneyRequest(moneyRequestReport, true);
	}
	};

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01f5527691d839335a

[melvin-bot]

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

[lakchote]

@alitoshmatov please review proposals when you can. There's already one from @bernhardoj.

Thank you!

[alitoshmatov]

@bernhardoj Thank you for your proposal, your RCA makes sense and solution works.
We can go with @bernhardoj 's proposal

C+ reviewed 🎀 👀 🎀

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @lakchote is eligible for the choreEngineerContributorManagement assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[melvin-bot]

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

Offer link
Upwork job

[lakchote]

@bernhardoj's proposal LGTM to me too 👍

[melvin-bot]

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

Offer link
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 📖

[bernhardoj]

PR is ready

cc: @alitoshmatov

[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 1.4.62-17 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix missing checkmark next to Total amount after paying request while offline #39604

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-04-25. 🎊

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

• @bernhardoj requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)
• @alitoshmatov requires payment automatic offer (Reviewer)

[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:

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

[johncschuster]

@alitoshmatov, can you please complete the BZ Checklist above?

[johncschuster]

Payment has been issued!

[alitoshmatov]

• The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: [WAVE7] Hold Requests: Approving/Paying expense reports with held requests #33124
• 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/33124/files#r1582654533
• 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: No need
• Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug. It was small regression, no need for regression test

[johncschuster]

Thank you!