[HOLD for payment 2024-11-29] [$250] Search - The shortcut CTRL + K does not work with a user as employee in a WS

[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: 9.0.59-0
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/5191872
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team

Action Performed:

1. Sign in to the app with a new Gmail account
2. Choose "Get paid back by my employer" from the onboarding tasks
3. Type a Name and Last name and click the "Continue" button
4. Go to Settings, create a new workspace and invite a new account as an employee
5. Log in with the new employee's account in incognito mode
6. Press the shortcut CTRL + K to open search dialog

Expected Result:

The shortcut CTRL + K to open the search dialog should open correctly

Actual Result:

Pressing the combination CTRL + K to open the search dialog does not execute, while the other shortcuts such as CTRL + J and CTRL + D work correctly

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

Bug6658921_1731075276789.Ctrl___k_doesn_t_Work.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021854902169710515284
• Upwork Job ID: 1854902169710515284
• Last Price Increase: 2024-11-13
• Automatic offers:
• dukenv0307 | Contributor | 104806147
• truph01 | Contributor | 104867213

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @abekkala

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @danieldoglas (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.

[mountiny]

I ran into this problem in production already cc @daledah I believe someone pointed to your PR here #51547 any chance you could have a look?

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @abekkala (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]

@mountiny I want to confirm this: If an account is created optimistically by another user (for this issue, the account is created by search), then when logging in, this account will not have to go through onboarding steps. Is that correct?

[mountiny]

@daledah I think that is valid, the onboarding would not show up for them as we know what their purpose is in the app.

However, couple older accounts of internal employees cannot use the shortcut either

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021854902169710515284

[melvin-bot]

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

[mountiny]

Happy to take over, looking for proposals to get this fixed soon

[mountiny]

Noting that this seems to have started from #51547 so @daledah and @dukenv0307 should try to fix it

[mountiny]

as its still in the regression period

[mountiny]

@daledah we have reverted the change as this bug was a major productivity issue for our team. Can you please give it another try and ensure you avoid this bug again?

@truph01 I think your change is still valuable so I would go with it but for normal reward $250

[melvin-bot]

Upwork job price has been updated to $250

[dukenv0307]

@mountiny I think @daledah should raise the PR with this change

[daledah]

@dukenv0307 Here's the PR

[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 9.0.65-5 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: The shortcut CTRL + K does not work with a user as employee in a WS #52448
• fix: prevent open search on onboarding route #52534

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-11-29. 🎊

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

• @dukenv0307 requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)
• @truph01 requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)

[melvin-bot]

@dukenv0307 @abekkala @dukenv0307 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]

[dukenv0307]

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
• 2b. Reported on staging (deploy blocker)
• 2c. 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: The offending PR is reverted, we use the new approach

• [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. Yes

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

Test:

1. Log in with any account in incognito mode
2. Turn on console and type: Onyx.set('nvp_onboarding', '{"selfTourViewed": true}');
3. Press the shortcut CTRL + K to open search dialog
4. Verify he shortcut CTRL + K to open the search dialog should open correctly

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[mountiny]

I am not sure if we need such test

[abekkala]

PAYMENT SUMMARY FOR NOV 29

• Fix: @truph01 [$250]offer (Contributor)
• PR Review: @dukenv0307 [$250] offer (Contributor)

[abekkala]

@truph01 payment sent and contract ended - thank you! 🎉

[abekkala]

@dukenv0307 waiting for acceptance of offer in Upwork - thanks!

[dukenv0307]

@abekkala I have requested ND payment. The Upwork offer is not needed. Thanks!

[abekkala]

@dukenv0307 Ah ok, I see you were just added to NewDot payments on Nov 19. (But the auto offer was sent still by melvin)

thanks!

---

PAYMENT SUMMARY

• @dukenv0307 [$250]

[JmillsExpensify]

$250 approved for @dukenv0307