[HOLD for payment 2024-06-20] [HOLD for payment 2024-06-18] [$250] Composer focus is lost if a new message is received while typing

[isagoico]

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: v1.4.81-1
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: NO

Issue reported by: @mountiny
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1718015667516489

Action Performed:

Tip: To easily test this, log in with 2 accounts in different devices (e.g: Web & iOS)

1. As account A start typing something in the compose box
2. As account B, sent a message to A while they're typing

Expected Result:

Compose box focus should remain while receiving a new message.

Actual Result:

Compose box focus is lost if the user is typing and a new message is received.

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

Screenshots/Videos

lost.focus.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01b0384bb7db3c3ab2
• Upwork Job ID: 1800145000444915700
• Last Price Increase: 2024-06-10

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @JmillsExpensify

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @JmillsExpensify (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[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.

[mountiny]

I dont think this is a backend bug

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01b0384bb7db3c3ab2

[melvin-bot]

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

[SzymczakJ]

Hey! I’m Jakub Szymczak from Software Mansion, an expert agency, and I’d like to work on this issue!

[mountiny]

@SzymczakJ Reminder that this is a deploy blocker so please leave frequent updates on your findings for the fix as we will have to cherry pick the fix to staging today

[SzymczakJ]

looks like this PR causes the bug: #43083. I continue working on this so maybe we won't have to revert this

[SzymczakJ]

Let's not be hasty with reverting #43083. I can reproduce bug on commit that merges #43083 into main and I cannot reproduce this bug on the commit before, but reverting #43083 doesn't fix the problem 😬, so I may be mistaken in some way and #43083 isn't the real cause. I need some more time with this bug.

[luacmartins]

Keep us updated @SzymczakJ

[luacmartins]

This was fixed by this revert #43431

[luacmartins]

Fixed in staging. Closing.

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.4.81-11 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Revert "chore: remove all selection ranges during navigation" #43431

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-06-18. 🎊

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

• @Ollyws requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @SzymczakJ 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:

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

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.4.82-4 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Revert "chore: remove all selection ranges during navigation" #43431

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-06-20. 🎊

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

• @Ollyws requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @SzymczakJ 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:

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