[HOLD for payment 2024-06-20] [HOLD for payment 2024-06-18] [HOLD for payment 2024-06-13] [HelpDot] article content for both platforms is shown by default

[rushatgabhane]

Problem:
When you open an article that has content for both old dot and new dot, the content is shown for both.

Solution:
Hide content of the platform that is not selected.

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @sonialiap

[melvin-bot]

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

[rushatgabhane]

issue resolved

[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 1.4.79-11 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• [HelpDot] choose a platform by default #42983

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-06-13. 🎊

[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:

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

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.4.81-11 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• [HelpDot] add undefined checks #43030

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-06-18. 🎊

[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:

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

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.4.82-4 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• [HelpDot] add undefined checks #43030

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-06-20. 🎊

[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:

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