[HOLD for payment 2024-12-30] [$125] Expense -Skeleton header & missing parent message in reimbursed thread when replying in thread

[IuliiaHerets]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 9.0.76-6
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: N/A - new feature, doesn't exist in prod
If this was caught on HybridApp, is this reproducible on New Expensify Standalone?: Yes, reproducible on both
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: Exp
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): [email protected]
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Device used: Mac 15.0 / Chrome
App Component: Money Requests

Action Performed:

Precondition:

• Admin and employee are in the same workspace.
• Workspace has set up bank account.
• Employee has set up personal bank account.

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. [Employee] Go to workspace chat.
3. [Employee] Submit an expense to the workspace chat.
4. [Admin] Pay the expense with Expensify.
5. [Employee] Go to the expense report.
6. [Employee] Refresh the page if the reimbursed message does not appear.
7. [Employee] Right click on the reimbursed message > Reply in thread.
8. [Employee] Send a reply in thread.

Expected Result:

The reimbursed message thread will not show skeleton header and missing parent message.

Actual Result:

The reimbursed message thread shows skeleton header and missing parent message when reply is sent in thread.
LHN also shows Hidden for the thread.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

Screenshots/Videos

Bug6694956_1734280856491.20241216_003532.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021868984405300646229
• Upwork Job ID: 1868984405300646229
• Last Price Increase: 2024-12-17

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @adelekennedy

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @adelekennedy (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 @johnmlee101 (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.

[cristipaval]

@bernhardoj @fedirjh this seems to be a regression of #54102. Do you have time to work on it?

[bernhardoj]

It's a BE problem. After adding a reply, the BE returns an empty message for the parent action (if it's empty, then the App think it's deleted)

[cristipaval]

ah yes, you're right, the App shows it correctly until the App sends the message and overrides the reportAction data with whatever the backend sends back

[cristipaval]

^Backend PR up

[cristipaval]

Removing the App deploy blocker since it is a backend issue.

[cristipaval]

@bernhardoj, the backend fix is deployed, but the App still shows a bad title in the thread header until the user sends a text message. Do you want to work on an App fix to make it work consistently?

[melvin-bot]

Upwork job price has been updated to $125

[cristipaval]

I made this issue a $125, given that it is a simple one.

Also assigned @fedirjh as the C+ and @bernhardoj as the contributor to fix it, given that they already have context on this matter. Please let me know guys if you don't want to work on it.

[bernhardoj]

Checking

[bernhardoj]

I can take it, PR is ready

cc: @fedirjh

[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 9.0.77-6 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix reimbursed action thread doesn't show full title #54248

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-12-30. 🎊

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

• @fedirjh requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @bernhardoj requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests

[melvin-bot]

@fedirjh @adelekennedy @fedirjh The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed. Please copy/paste the BugZero Checklist from here into a new comment on this GH and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[melvin-bot]

Payment Summary

Upwork Job

• Reviewer: @fedirjh owed $125 via NewDot
• Reviewer: @bernhardoj owed $125 via NewDot

BugZero Checklist (@adelekennedy)

• 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/1868984405300646229/hired)
• I have paid out the Upwork contracts or cancelled the ones that are incorrect
• I have verified the payment summary above is correct

[adelekennedy]

no Upwork payment necessary, Payment summary above is correct!

[bernhardoj]

I think the payment summary should be $125.

Requested in ND.

[melvin-bot]

@cristipaval, @fedirjh, @bernhardoj, @adelekennedy Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[fedirjh]

BugZero Checklist:

• [Contributor] Classify the bug:

Bug classification

Source of bug:

• 1a. Result of the original design (eg. a case wasn't considered)
• 1b. Mistake during implementation
• 1c. Backend bug
• 1z. Other:

Where bug was reported:

• 2a. Reported on production (eg. bug slipped through the normal regression and PR testing process on staging)
• 2b. Reported on staging (eg. found during regression or PR testing)
• 2d. Reported on a PR
• 2z. Other:

Who reported the bug:

• 3a. Expensify user
• 3b. Expensify employee
• 3c. Contributor
• 3d. QA
• 3z. Other:

• [Contributor] 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: N/A. It's a backend issue

• [Contributor] If the regression was CRITICAL (e.g. interrupts a core flow) A discussion in #expensify-open-source 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: N/A

• [Contributor] If it was decided to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps using the template below to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.

N/A , it seems we have a regression test for this bug.

Regression Test Proposal Template

• [BugZero Assignee] Create a GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon.

  Link to issue:

Regression Test Proposal

Precondition:

Test:

Do we agree 👍 or 👎