[HOLD for payment 2023-11-21] [DISTANCE] [$500] LOW: BUG: individuals can be selected for distance requests

[neil-marcellini]

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: v1.3.89-6
Reproducible in staging?: yes
Reproducible in production?: yes
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail:
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers):
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @Ashim Sharma
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1693731984757459

Action Performed:

1. go to fab button -> request money -> distance
2. Select valid addresses in start and finish points
3. click next
4. Now type in and select a user's mail address . eg user1@gmail.com

Expected Result:

Individuals should not appear as participant options for distance requests

Actual Result:

Individuals do appear as participant options for distance requests. After selecting one the confirmation page shows the amount as $0.

Workaround:

You will get an error after requesting and can make a request to a workspace instead.

Platforms:

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

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

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

https://expensify.enterprise.slack.com/files/U04H96S40LC/F05RFFKS9T2/screen_recording_2023-09-03_at_2.45.37_pm.mov

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01c5428782ec334786
• Upwork Job ID: 1716560993895415808
• Last Price Increase: 2023-10-23
• Automatic offers:
• cubuspl42 | Reviewer | 27491620
• neonbhai | Contributor | 27491621

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01c5428782ec334786

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Bug0 Triage Checklist (Main S/O)

• This "bug" occurs on a supported platform (ensure Platforms in OP are ✅)
• This bug is not a duplicate report (check E/App issues and #expensify-bugs)
  • If it is, comment with a link to the original report, close the issue and add any novel details to the original issue instead
• This bug is reproducible using the reproduction steps in the OP. S/O
  • If the reproduction steps are clear and you're unable to reproduce the bug, check with the reporter and QA first, then close the issue.
  • If the reproduction steps aren't clear and you determine the correct steps, please update the OP.
• This issue is filled out as thoroughly and clearly as possible
  • Pay special attention to the title, results, platforms where the bug occurs, and if the bug happens on staging/production.
• I have reviewed and subscribed to the linked Slack conversation to ensure Slack/Github stay in sync

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @cubuspl42 (External)

[neonbhai]

Proposal

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

Individuals can be selected for distance requests

What is the root cause of that problem?

We can invite individuals in MoneyRequestParticipantsSelector even in DistanceRequest Flow

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

We should pass canInviteUser param as false when we are in a Distance Request flow (i.e., isDistanceRequest is true).

This param will be conditionally false:

App/src/pages/iou/steps/MoneyRequstParticipantsPage/MoneyRequestParticipantsSelector.js

Line 237 in 3d99502

true,

...
!isDistanceRequest,
...

This will make sure user can invite individuals only when the request is not a distance request.

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

We can also change the Text Input Label to show Workspace Name instead of the misleading Name, email, or phone number

[dukenv0307]

Proposal

Bring proposal from #27070 and update since MoneyRequestParticipantsSelector is updated to function component

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

The user account can be selected as participant for distance request

What is the root cause of that problem?

In MoneyRequestParticipantsSelector, We disable the P2P option here but we don't exclude the invited user for distance request

App/src/pages/iou/steps/MoneyRequstParticipantsPage/MoneyRequestParticipantsSelector.js

Line 230 in d282473

!isDistanceRequest,

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

In MoneyRequestParticipantsSelector, we should pass canInviteUser params as false here to exclude the invited user option for distance request.

const chatOptions = OptionsListUtils.getFilteredOptions(
    reports,
    personalDetails,
    betas,
    searchTerm,
    participants,
    CONST.EXPENSIFY_EMAILS,

    // If we are using this component in the "Request money" flow then we pass the includeOwnedWorkspaceChats argument so that the current user
    // sees the option to request money from their admin on their own Workspace Chat.
    iouType === CONST.IOU.TYPE.REQUEST,

    // We don't want to include any P2P options like personal details or reports that are not workspace chats for certain features.
    !isDistanceRequest,
    false,
    {},
    [],
    false,
    {},
    [],
    true,
    !isDistanceRequest,
);

App/src/pages/iou/steps/MoneyRequstParticipantsPage/MoneyRequestParticipantsSelector.js

Line 230 in d282473

!isDistanceRequest,

OPTIONAL: We can update the placeholder of text input accordingly when the request is distance request

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

NA

Result

Screencast.from.07-09-2023.16.47.27.webm

[melvin-bot]

📣 @shahinyan11! 📣
Hey, it seems we don’t have your contributor details yet! You'll only have to do this once, and this is how we'll hire you on Upwork.
Please follow these steps:

1. Make sure you've read and understood the contributing guidelines.
2. Get the email address used to login to your Expensify account. If you don't already have an Expensify account, create one here. If you have multiple accounts (e.g. one for testing), please use your main account email.
3. Get the link to your Upwork profile. It's necessary because we only pay via Upwork. You can access it by logging in, and then clicking on your name. It'll look like this. If you don't already have an account, sign up for one here.
4. Copy the format below and paste it in a comment on this issue. Replace the placeholder text with your actual details.
   
   Format:

Contributor details
Your Expensify account email: <REPLACE EMAIL HERE>
Upwork Profile Link: <REPLACE LINK HERE>

[Christinadobrzyn]

hi @cubuspl42 could you take a peek at the proposals to see if any will work?

[cubuspl42]

@dukenv0307

How should I understand you problem summary?

Misleading- Distance request money does not work with email & phone number

It sounds somewhat different from the rest of the thread

[dukenv0307]

The user account can be selected as participant for distance request

@cubuspl42 It's the name of the old issue. Updated the problem to make this clearer.

[Christinadobrzyn]

looks like we're reviewing proposals! @cubuspl42 please feel free to add any other updates!

[cubuspl42]

@dukenv0307 Thanks for clarification! Now, the proposal seems fully equivalent to the earlier one. Would you point any differences?

If there are none, this proposal shouldn't have been submitted per the contributing guidelines.

[dukenv0307]

@cubuspl42 My proposal is submitted in another issue #27070 that is the same with this issue and just update the permalink to the latest main. So I think I should have a higher priority here.

We have the same case in the previous issues #25538 (comment) and #26019 (comment)

[cubuspl42]

@dukenv0307 Oh, I understand. While I get your perspective, I don't think that I'll treat it this way. The fix is relatively straight-forward, and each contributor could get to it independently. And separate issues are separate issues.

[cubuspl42]

The fix to update the usage of the canInviteUser param is straight-forward. The first one to suggest it here was @neonbhai (even though @dukenv0307 suggested it earlier as a solution to a different but somewhat related issue).

In my opinion, we should go with @neonbhai

C+ reviewed 🎀 👀 🎀

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @hayata-suenaga, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.

[dukenv0307]

@cubuspl42 Actually this issue is dupe of #27070. You can see the step and the bug in this issue #27070. This bug and the root cause are the same with this issue. That is the reason I bring the proposal from that issue to here.

[hayata-suenaga]

@cubuspl42 can you check the commemt above and check if this is the dupe?

[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 1.3.98-5 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Participants Invite Fix #30920

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-11-21. 🎊

After the hold period is over and BZ checklist items are completed, please complete any of the applicable payments for this issue, and check them off once done.

• External issue reporter
• Contributor that fixed the issue
• Contributor+ that helped on the issue and/or PR

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

• @cubuspl42 requires payment offer (Reviewer)
• @neonbhai requires payment offer (Contributor)

[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:

• [@cubuspl42] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@cubuspl42] 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:
• [@cubuspl42] 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:
• [@cubuspl42] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@cubuspl42] 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.
• [@Christinadobrzyn] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[cubuspl42]

• The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
  • N/A (this was more of a "UX bug"; we needed to adjust the app's behavior until [TRACKING] Enable P2P distance requests #23291 is live)
• 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
• 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 for additional discussion
• Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
  • No need for a regression test (this functionality will soon change as part of [TRACKING] Enable P2P distance requests #23291)
• 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.
  • N/A

[Christinadobrzyn]

I'm going ooo until Monday Nov 27th so going to assign another BZ teammate to monitor this until I'm back. Thanks!

Status: Waiting for payment on Nov 21

Payouts due:

Issue Reporter: $50 @ashim Sharma
Contributor: $500 @neonbhai
Contributor+: $500 @cubuspl42

Eligible for 50% #urgency bonus? N

Upwork job is here.

[melvin-bot]

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

[laurenreidexpensify]

Payment due tomorrow

[laurenreidexpensify]

Payment Summary:

• Issue Reporter: $50 @ashim Sharma - offer sent in Upwork
• Contributor: $500 @neonbhai - paid in Upwork
• Contributor+: $500 @cubuspl42 - paid in Upwork

[laurenreidexpensify]

Payment Summary:

Issue Reporter: $50 @ashim Sharma - paid in Upwork
Contributor: $500 @neonbhai - paid in Upwork
Contributor+: $500 @cubuspl42 - paid in Upwork