[HOLD for payment 2024-10-29] [HOLD for payment 2024-10-25] [$250] Scan Receipts-When adding scan receipts back to back user is asked to fill Merchant field

[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: 9.0.50-1
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: N
If this was caught on HybridApp, is this reproducible on New Expensify Standalone?: N/A
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: https://expensify.testrail.io/index.php?/tests/view/5091787
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team

Action Performed:

1.Log in the app as a WS employee
2.Go to the WS chat and click plus
3. Select Submit expense
4. In the Right Hand Modal(RHM) select Scan
5. Choose a file from the device and click Submit expense
6. Repeat one more time steps 2-6

Expected Result:

User is able to submit back to back scan expenses

Actual Result:

When submitting a second Scanned expense, the user can see the preview of the receipt in the Right Hand Modal, but is asked to fill in the Merchant field, as in manual expense. Basically, the RHN displays the Manual expense modal instead of the Scan Modal

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

• Android: Standalone
• Android: HybridApp
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Standalone
• iOS: HybridApp
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6637652_1729168093941.scanmanual.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021846931377957155675
• Upwork Job ID: 1846931377957155675
• Last Price Increase: 2024-10-17
• Automatic offers:
• dominictb | Reviewer | 104466552

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @johncschuster

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

💬 A slack conversation has been started in #expensify-open-source

[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.

[lanitochka17]

Production:

bandicam.2024-10-17.16-59-25-383.mp4

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @johncschuster (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.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021846931377957155675

[melvin-bot]

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

[Nodebrute]

Regression from #50772

cc: @bernhardoj

[bondydaa]

looks like it is related, #50772 (comment). taking off help wanted since @bernhardoj will fix.

[bernhardoj]

👋

[melvin-bot]

📣 @dominictb 🎉 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

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

[kavimuru]

Bug is fixed

Recording.2055.mp4

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

[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 9.0.50-8 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix money request is initialized with the wrong information #51040

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-10-25. 🎊

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

• @bernhardoj requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @dominictb 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:

• [@dominictb] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@dominictb] 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:
• [@dominictb] 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:
• [@dominictb] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@dominictb] 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:

[rayane-djouah]

@bondydaa This can be closed as we fixed it in a follow-up to our original PR

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.0.51-4 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix money request is initialized with the wrong information #51040

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-10-29. 🎊

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

• @bernhardoj requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @dominictb 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:

• [@dominictb] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@dominictb] 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:
• [@dominictb] 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:
• [@dominictb] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@dominictb] 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: