[Due for payment 2025-02-25] [$250] Wrong system message when updating role in Spanish

[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: 9.0.89-5
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: Y
If this was caught on HybridApp, is this reproducible on New Expensify Standalone?:
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: @dukenv0307
Slack conversation (hyperlinked to channel name): expensify_bugs

Action Performed:

1. Invite a new user to a workspace
2. Update role of this user to admin
3. Update role of this user to auditor
4. Go to #admin room

Expected Result:

System message of update role show correct

Actual Result:

System message of update role shows wrong

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

bug-resize.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021884096456183632431
• Upwork Job ID: 1884096456183632431
• Last Price Increase: 2025-01-28
• Automatic offers:
• shubham1206agra | Contributor | 105909090

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @MitchExpensify

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @MitchExpensify (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.

[m-natarajan]

Propopsal from @shubham1206agra

Proposal

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

Wrong system message when updating role in Spanish

What is the root cause of that problem?

In

App/src/languages/es.ts

Lines 4970 to 4975 in b59f23b

	addEmployee: ({email, role}: AddEmployeeParams) => `agregó a ${email} como ${role === 'miembro' || role === 'user' ? 'miembro' : 'administrador'}`,
	updateRole: ({email, currentRole, newRole}: UpdateRoleParams) =>
	`actualicé el rol ${email} de ${currentRole === 'miembro' || currentRole === 'user' ? 'miembro' : 'administrador'} a ${
	newRole === 'miembro' || newRole === 'user' ? 'miembro' : 'administrador'
	}`,
	removeMember: ({email, role}: AddEmployeeParams) => `eliminado ${role === 'miembro' || role === 'user' ? 'miembro' : 'administrador'} ${email}`,

We do not cover the case of auditor role of the workspace user. That causes the wrong translation to occur.

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

Let's simplify these translations

Change

App/src/languages/es.ts

Lines 4970 to 4975 in b59f23b

	addEmployee: ({email, role}: AddEmployeeParams) => `agregó a ${email} como ${role === 'miembro' || role === 'user' ? 'miembro' : 'administrador'}`,
	updateRole: ({email, currentRole, newRole}: UpdateRoleParams) =>
	`actualicé el rol ${email} de ${currentRole === 'miembro' || currentRole === 'user' ? 'miembro' : 'administrador'} a ${
	newRole === 'miembro' || newRole === 'user' ? 'miembro' : 'administrador'
	}`,
	removeMember: ({email, role}: AddEmployeeParams) => `eliminado ${role === 'miembro' || role === 'user' ? 'miembro' : 'administrador'} ${email}`,

to

addEmployee: ({email, role}: AddEmployeeParams) => `agregó a ${email} como ${role}`,
updateRole: ({email, currentRole, newRole}: UpdateRoleParams) => `actualicé el rol ${email} de ${currentRole} a ${newRole}`,
removeMember: ({email, role}: AddEmployeeParams) => `eliminado ${role} ${email}`,

Now, let's update the reference of these (utilizing translation of workspace.common.roleName)

Change

App/src/libs/ReportActionsUtils.ts

Lines 1755 to 1757 in b59f23b

	const newRole = originalMessage?.newValue ?? '';
	const oldRole = originalMessage?.oldValue ?? '';
	return translateLocal('report.actions.type.updateRole', {email, newRole, currentRole: oldRole});

to

const newRole = translateLocal('workspace.common.roleName', {role: originalMessage?.newValue ?? ''}).toLowerCase(); 
const oldRole = translateLocal('workspace.common.roleName', {role: originalMessage?.oldValue ?? ''}).toLowerCase(); 
return translateLocal('report.actions.type.updateRole', {email, newRole, currentRole: oldRole}); 

Change

App/src/libs/ReportActionsUtils.ts

Lines 1740 to 1742 in b59f23b

	const role = originalMessage?.role ?? '';
	const formattedEmail = formatPhoneNumber(email);
	return translateLocal('report.actions.type.addEmployee', {email: formattedEmail, role});

to

const role = translateLocal('workspace.common.roleName', {role: originalMessage?.role ?? ''}).toLowerCase();
const formattedEmail = formatPhoneNumber(email);
return translateLocal('report.actions.type.addEmployee', {email: formattedEmail, role});

And change

App/src/libs/ReportActionsUtils.ts

Lines 1772 to 1773 in b59f23b

	const role = originalMessage?.role ?? '';
	return translateLocal('report.actions.type.removeMember', {email, role});

to

const role = translateLocal('workspace.common.roleName', {role: originalMessage?.role ?? ''}).toLowerCase();
return translateLocal('report.actions.type.removeMember', {email, role});

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

NA since this is a simple translation change

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[daledah]

Proposal

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

Wrong system message when updating role in Spanish

What is the root cause of that problem?

App/src/languages/es.ts

Lines 4971 to 4974 in b59f23b

	updateRole: ({email, currentRole, newRole}: UpdateRoleParams) =>
	`actualicé el rol ${email} de ${currentRole === 'miembro' || currentRole === 'user' ? 'miembro' : 'administrador'} a ${
	newRole === 'miembro' || newRole === 'user' ? 'miembro' : 'administrador'
	}`,

In the condition above we are using 'auditor' instead of 'user' because the role can only be user, auditor, admin

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

We should update all 'miembro' in the condition to 'auditor'

App/src/languages/es.ts

Lines 4971 to 4974 in b59f23b

	updateRole: ({email, currentRole, newRole}: UpdateRoleParams) =>
	`actualicé el rol ${email} de ${currentRole === 'miembro' || currentRole === 'user' ? 'miembro' : 'administrador'} a ${
	newRole === 'miembro' || newRole === 'user' ? 'miembro' : 'administrador'
	}`,

We should do the same way with addEmployee, removeMember

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

None

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Reminder: Please use plain English, be brief and avoid jargon. Feel free to use images, charts or pseudo-code if necessary. Do not post large multi-line diffs or write walls of text. Do not create PRs unless you have been hired for this job.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021884096456183632431

[melvin-bot]

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

[dangrous]

I can take a look at this once it's ready for an internal engineer!

[rojiphil]

Will pick this up for proposal review today

[rojiphil]

Thanks for the proposals

@daledah Replacing 'miembro' with 'auditor' may work but it is better to do a clean up as suggested in @shubham1206agra proposal.

@shubham1206agra I like the idea of simplifying the translations using the translation of workspace.common.roleName. Also, note that workspace.common.roleName would return member instead of the currently used user. We would have to confirm if this change is fine.
Otherwise @shubham1206agra proposal LGTM.
🎀👀🎀 C+ reviewed

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @dangrous is eligible for the choreEngineerContributorManagement assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[shubham1206agra]

Thanks for the proposals

@daledah Replacing 'miembro' with 'auditor' may work but it is better to do a clean up as suggested in @shubham1206agra proposal.

@shubham1206agra I like the idea of simplifying the translations using the translation of workspace.common.roleName. Also, note that workspace.common.roleName would return member instead of the currently used user. We would have to confirm if this change is fine. Otherwise @shubham1206agra proposal LGTM. 🎀👀🎀 C+ reviewed

@rojiphil We can modify this if we found some edge case in the PR itself.

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @dangrous is eligible for the choreEngineerContributorManagement assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[dangrous]

Hi! This looks good, I think member instead of user is fine but I can double check internally.

However, can we be sure to add some unit tests for the new behavior (translated) of getPolicyChangeLogChangeRoleMessage and the other utils we're changing? Thanks!

[melvin-bot]

📣 @shubham1206agra 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job
Please accept the offer and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[dangrous]

yep "member" is expected!

[dangrous]

Hi again! I think we might want to hold our PR on #55596, which will change that logic slightly. Should be essentially the same solution, though.

[dangrous]

Updated title to hold on that other issue.

[melvin-bot]

@rojiphil, @dangrous, @MitchExpensify, @shubham1206agra Huh... This is 4 days overdue. Who can take care of this?

[melvin-bot]

@rojiphil @dangrous @MitchExpensify @shubham1206agra this issue was created 2 weeks ago. Are we close to approving a proposal? If not, what's blocking us from getting this issue assigned? Don't hesitate to create a thread in #expensify-open-source to align faster in real time. Thanks!

[MitchExpensify]

@shubham1206agra When do you expect the PR to be ready for review?

[shubham1206agra]

@MitchExpensify I will ready the PR today

[melvin-bot]

@rojiphil, @dangrous, @MitchExpensify, @shubham1206agra Huh... This is 4 days overdue. Who can take care of this?

[melvin-bot]

@rojiphil, @dangrous, @MitchExpensify, @shubham1206agra Still overdue 6 days?! Let's take care of this!

[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 9.0.99-2 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fixed spanish translation of update member role #56589

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2025-02-25. 🎊

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

• @rojiphil requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @shubham1206agra requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)
• @dukenv0307 requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests

[melvin-bot]

@rojiphil / @shubham1206agra @MitchExpensify @rojiphil / @shubham1206agra 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]

[MitchExpensify]

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:

• [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:

• [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.

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 👎

[MitchExpensify]

Payment summary:

• $250 @rojiphil requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• $250 @shubham1206agra requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)

[MitchExpensify]

@rojiphil bump on the BZ steps above

[rojiphil]

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:

• [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: Not Required. The existing checklist is good enough to capture such issues.

• [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.

Regression Test Proposal

Precondition:

Test:

1. Navigate to Workspace settings and, then, to Members
2. Select a member and update the role to admin.
3. Navigate to #admins room and verify that the translations are correct for English and Spanish.
4. Repeat the steps from 1 to 3 and update the role to auditor
5. Navigate to #admins room and verify that the translations are correct for English and Spanish.

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[rojiphil]

@MitchExpensify BZ Checklist done. Thanks.

[melvin-bot]

@MitchExpensify Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!