[HOLD for payment 2024-07-24] [ESM] Expense - System message for receipt removal is different in expense report and LHN preview

[izarutskaya]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 9.0.4-0
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: N
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: https://expensify.testrail.io/index.php?/tests/view/4693737
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Issue reported by: Applause-Internal team

Action Performed:

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Go to any chat.
3. Submit an expense with receipt.
4. Go to transaction thread.
5. Click on the receipt.
6. Click 3-dot menu > Delete receipt.
7. Delete the receipt.
8. Return to expense report.

Expected Result:

The system message for receipt removal will be the same in the report and LHN.

Actual Result:

The system message for receipt removal is "removed the receipt" in the report, while it shows "detached a receipt from expense '(none)'" in LHN.
When copied to clipboard, it shows "You detached a receipt from expense '(none)'" instead.

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

Bug6532839_1720079856793.bandicam_2024-07-04_15-53-33-348.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @jliexpensify

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @grgia (DeployBlockerCash), see https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/9980/ for more details.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @jliexpensify (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.

[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.

[izarutskaya]

@jliexpensify I haven't added the External label as I wasn't 100% sure about this issue. Please take a look and add the label if you agree it's a bug and can be handled by external contributors.

[izarutskaya]

We think this issue might be related to the #collect project.

[grgia]

@bernhardoj could this be related to #43079 ?

[grgia]

cc @parasharrajat

[parasharrajat]

We did change this message for the delete action as per the design doc https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/43079/files#diff-b8041d6cb129cc7b8a6223f8ffa570e79c326d8ea4affbad35c33cf6c8ea660dR1264 but looks like the backend is sending a different message.

We either need to update that or add more logic on the frontend to handle that.

I wouldn't call this a regression but another case to handle out of the design doc. @BrtqKr Do you mind looking into this?

[grgia]

Going to demote this, not really a deploy blocker

[grgia]

@deetergp this is related to Localize System Messages

[nkdengineer]

The same root cause with #44831.

[parasharrajat]

Looks like you added the wrong link. It is referring to the same issue.

[BrtqKr]

Ok, so couple of things to cover here:

• I've added additional case for old dot messages in the copy to clipboard to cover it and it seems to be working as expected I'll send a PR in a moment, but...
• I've noticed that when I try to modify the expense, for example the amount in the old dot I'm getting an action id from the NewDot instead, MODIFIEDEXPENSE when it should be CHANGEFIELD to be more precise. It seems to be working as expected (without (none) in the message), but I've noticed that it appeared even with none a couple of times previously. I believe there's something wrong with the OldDot messages sent by the back-end in general, do you know what could be causing it?

[parasharrajat]

I don't have any idea on on what's going on with backend. @deetergp Could you please help with this?

[BrtqKr]

I sent the draft. If there are any other issues related to that, I'll include them in the PR, but let's confirm it first.

[grgia]

bumped for more background from the project

[deetergp]

@BrtqKr The CHANGEFIELD system message is created in OldDot when an admin modifies a report field in Workspace > [workspace name] > Reports, you should not expect to see that when you change an expense. And the MODIFIEDEXPENSE action should only happen when someone other than the submitter modifies the expense.

[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 9.0.7-8 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• [ESM] Add conditon for old dot messages #44907

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-07-24. 🎊

[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:

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

[jliexpensify]

Payment Summary

• C+: @sobitneupane $250 (New.Dot payment)

[melvin-bot]

Skipping the payment summary for this issue since all the assignees are employees or vendors. If this is incorrect, please manually add the payment summary SO.

[jliexpensify]

Bumping @grgia or @sobitneupane to confirm if payments are needed!

[sobitneupane]

@jliexpensify I reviewed the PR linked with this issue. I will request payment in newDot.

[jliexpensify]

Nice, ok the payment summary is correct then. Thanks!

[JmillsExpensify]

$250 approved for @sobitneupane