[$250] The "new workspace" button is shown in Global Create to accounts already on workspaces

[m-natarajan]

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: 9.0.21-0
Reproducible in staging?: y
Reproducible in production?: y
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: @puneetlath
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1723669119268099

Action Performed:

1. Invite user A to user B workspace
2. Login as User B
3. Click on global +

Expected Result:

Create new workspace should not appear

Actual Result:

New workspace option appears

Workaround:

unknown

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

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~017c30fdb0f2028e60
• Upwork Job ID: 1824549832586983861
• Last Price Increase: 2024-08-16

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @sakluger (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.

[daledah]

Proposal

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

We're showing the "new workspace" button in Global Create to accounts that are already on workspaces

What is the root cause of that problem?

Currently, we'll show the "new workspace" button in Global Create when the user has any active free policies (aka workspaces)

In function hasActiveChatEnabledPolicies we only check with admin role

App/src/libs/actions/Policy/Policy.ts

Lines 237 to 242 in ad2ff21

	const adminChatEnabledPolicies = Object.values(policies ?? {}).filter(
	(policy) =>
	policy &&
	((policy.type === CONST.POLICY.TYPE.FREE && policy.role === CONST.POLICY.ROLE.ADMIN) ||
	(!includeOnlyFreePolicies && policy.type !== CONST.POLICY.TYPE.PERSONAL && policy.role === CONST.POLICY.ROLE.ADMIN && policy.isPolicyExpenseChatEnabled)),
	);

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

1. We add new param shouldExcludeAdmin with default is false to function hasActiveChatEnabledPolicies

    const adminChatEnabledPolicies = Object.values(policies ?? {}).filter(
        (policy) =>
            policy &&
            ((policy.type === CONST.POLICY.TYPE.FREE && policy.role === CONST.POLICY.ROLE.ADMIN) ||
                (!includeOnlyFreePolicies &&
                    policy.type !== CONST.POLICY.TYPE.PERSONAL &&
+                  (!shouldExcludeAdmin ? policy.role === CONST.POLICY.ROLE.ADMIN : true) &&
                    policy.isPolicyExpenseChatEnabled)),
    );

2. Pass param shouldExcludeAdmin = true in this condition

App/src/pages/home/sidebar/SidebarScreen/FloatingActionButtonAndPopover.tsx

Line 465 in ad2ff21

...(!isLoading && !Policy.hasActiveChatEnabledPolicies(allPolicies)

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

We'll write a new function to check the user was in a workspace that was not of type personal.

 Object.values(policies ?? {}).filter((policy) => {
            return policy?.type !== CONST.POLICY.TYPE.PERSONAL;
        }).length !== 0

[sakluger]

Before I add the external label, I'm confirming the expected behavior in the original bug report thread in Slack.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~017c30fdb0f2028e60

[melvin-bot]

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

[thesahindia]

@daledah's proposal looks good to me!

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed

[melvin-bot]

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

[arosiclair]

@daledah @thesahindia

We should also remove the includeOnlyFreePolcies param and policy.type === CONST.POLICY.TYPE.FREE since there are no free policies anymore. Then let's use a new includeOnlyAdminPolicies param that's false by default. So the new initial condition should just be

const chatEnabledPolicies = Object.values(policies).filter((policy) => policy?.isPolicyExpenseChatEnabled && (!includeOnlyAdminPolicies || policy.role === CONST.POLICY.ROLE.ADMIN));

[melvin-bot]

📣 @daledah You have been assigned to this job!
Please apply to the Upwork job and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Once you apply to this job, your Upwork ID will be stored and you will be automatically hired for future jobs!
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[daledah]

@thesahindia This PR is ready for review.

[sakluger]

The automation didn't work, but this is on prod! Payment was due around Sept 2.

[sakluger]

Summarizing payment on this issue:

Contributor: @daledah $250, sent offer via Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/nx/wm/offer/103905329
Contributor+: @thesahindia $250, please request on Newdot

[sakluger]

@thesahindia could you please let me know if you think we need regression test steps here?

[melvin-bot]

@sakluger @arosiclair @thesahindia @daledah this issue is now 4 weeks old, please consider:

• Finding a contributor to fix the bug
• Closing the issue if BZ has been unable to add the issue to a VIP or Wave project
• If you have any questions, don't hesitate to start a discussion in #expensify-open-source

Thanks!

[thesahindia]

Sorry for the delay. I missed the notification on this.

Here are the test steps:-

1. As user "A" add user "B" to your workspace.
2. Login as user "B"
3. Click on FAB icon
4. Verify that "New workspace" option doesn't appear in the menu

[sakluger]

Thanks!

• I completed the Upwork payment to @daledah
• I created the GH issue for new regression test steps: https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/429317

I think we're all good here!

[garrettmknight]

$250 approved for @thesahindia