[HOLD for payment 2024-12-03] [Search v1] Implement next step actions in Search

[luacmartins]

Problem

Navigating to reports to perform actions, e.g. submit, approve, pay is time consuming and cumbersome.

Solution

Allow users to perform actins straight from the search page

Blockers to be fixed:

• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-03] [Search v1.2] - When paying via search, changes are not seen in LHN and expense preview #52360
• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-03] [Search v1.2] - Pay button displayed next to expense after unapproving #52364
• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-03] [Search v1.2] - Button loads infinitely when approving or paying expense in Search in offline mode #52365
• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-03] [Search v1.2] - Paid invoice shows "View" button instead of "Paid" label #52366
• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-03] [Search v1.2] Invoice preview still shows "User owes x" after the invoice is paid #52367
• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-03] [Search v1.2] Android - Expense - Unexpected error when submitting expense to same WS after paying another #52368
• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-03] [Search v1.2] - Paid expenses do not have "Paid" label when the expenses are grouped expenses #52369
• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-03] [Search v1.2] - Pay button can be clicked many times without error when bank account is not set up #52371
• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-03] [Search v1.2] - LHN preview shows 0.00 and no pay button when paying partially from Search #52375
• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-03] [Search v1.2] - Unable to pay held expense in Search #52377
• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-03] [Search v1.2] - Approve button is not disabled in Search when "Prevent self-approvals" is enabled #52404
• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-03] [Search v1.2] - Approve button disappears after deleting expense in report that has comments #52411
• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-03] [Search v1.2] - Pay button appears for report that will be auto-paid and it reappears after clicked #52418

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @OfstadC

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @RachCHopkins (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]

Triggered auto assignment to @OfstadC (NewFeature), see https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/14418#:~:text=BugZero%20process%20steps%20for%20feature%20requests for more details. Please add this Feature request to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[luacmartins]

It seems like the Auth PR made the Search command significantly slower. I'll look at logs next to see what the slow part is.

[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]

⚠️ 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]

⚠️ 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.

[luacmartins]

^

[luacmartins]

v2 PR in review

[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 9.0.66-8 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Show search action buttons v2 #52441

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-12-03. 🎊

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

• @alitoshmatov requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests

[melvin-bot]

BugZero Checklist: The PR adding this new feature has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed:

• [@alitoshmatov] Please propose regression test steps to ensure the new feature will work correctly on production in further releases.
• [@OfstadC] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon.

[alitoshmatov]

Regression Test Proposal

Pre-requisites:

• Make sure you have a report that can be approved, i.e. create a workspace, invite a member, turn on approvals and reimbursement (workflows), as the member submit a few expenses

1. Navigate to the Search page
2. Verify that you see the Approve button next to the expense/report that can be approved
3. Verify that the expense/report is approved and the button updates to Pay
4. Press Pay
5. Verify that the first time, you're navigated to the report in the RHP
6. Select a payment method from the settlement button in the report header
7. Pay the report
8. Pay another expense from the same chat, but this time the report should automatically be paid using the same payment method from step 6
9. Verify that the button changes to the Paid badge

• Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[melvin-bot]

Payment Summary

Upwork Job

• Reviewer: @alitoshmatov owed $250 via NewDot

BugZero Checklist (@OfstadC)

• I have verified the correct assignees and roles are listed above and updated the neccesary manual offers
• I have verified that there are no duplicate or incorrect contracts on Upwork for this job (https://www.upwork.com/ab/applicants//hired)
• I have paid out the Upwork contracts or cancelled the ones that are incorrect
• I have verified the payment summary above is correct

[alitoshmatov]

@luacmartins Would be great if you could revisit compensation amount here, we did handle a larger PR then usual for the new feature. Though we did also have first PR which was reverted due to several regressions. So not sure if amount increase applicable here.

[luacmartins]

I think we can keep the original amount of $250 (no penalties) given the size of the original PR, but that we also had quite a few regressions.

[OfstadC]

• No Upwork job to cancel
• Test Created in E/E
  
• Payment Summary is correct

[JmillsExpensify]

$250 approved for @alitoshmatov