[HOLD for payment 2024-04-15] [$500] Expense - Approve button appears in archived expense report

[kbecciv]

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: 1.4.51-3
Reproducible in staging?: y
Reproducible in production?: y
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team

Action Performed:

Precondition:

• Admin and employee are in the Collect workspace.
• The Approval mode in the Collect workspace is Submit and Close.

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com.
2. [Employee] Create a manual request in the workspace chat.
3. [Employee] Submit the report,
4. [Admin] Go to workspace chat with employee.
5. [Admin] Click Approve button.
6. [Admin] Click on the header subtitle to return to main chat.
7. {Admin] Click on expense preview to go to expense report.

Expected Result:

In Step 5, Approve button should not appear in expense report since the expense report is archived.

Actual Result:

In Step 5, Approve button appears in expense report when the expense report is archived.
When clicking Approve button, the expense report is no longer archived and back to archived state when reopening expense report (Step 7).

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

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6411984_1710315334923.bandicam_2024-03-13_15-27-32-588.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01d56509b7da773540
• Upwork Job ID: 1769820596774514688
• Last Price Increase: 2024-03-25
• Automatic offers:
• Ollyws | Reviewer | 0
• rojiphil | Contributor | 0

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @slafortune (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details.

[kbecciv]

@slafortune 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.

[Krishna2323]

Proposal

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

Expense - Approve button appears in archived expense report

What is the root cause of that problem?

Previous RCA

We don't check if the report is archived or not before determining valued for canIOUBePaid & canApproveIOU util functions.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Line 3682 in 632b1f8

return isPayer && !isOpenExpenseReport && !iouSettled && !iouReport?.isWaitingOnBankAccount && reimbursableSpend !== 0 && !iouCanceled && !isAutoReimbursable;

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Line 3685 in 632b1f8

function canApproveIOU(iouReport: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Report> | EmptyObject, chatReport: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Report> | EmptyObject, policy: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Policy> | EmptyObject) {

In canApproveIOU we don't check for ReportUtils.isArchivedRoom(chatReport) before returning the value. We do check for ReportUtils.isArchivedRoom(chatReport) in canIOUBePaid, we just need to do the same for canApproveIOU.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Line 3685 in 632b1f8

function canApproveIOU(iouReport: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Report> | EmptyObject, chatReport: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Report> | EmptyObject, policy: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Policy> | EmptyObject) {

Result

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Line 3663 in 632b1f8

const iouCanceled = ReportUtils.isArchivedRoom(chatReport);

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

Add !ReportUtils.isArchivedRoom(props.report) to canApproveIOU util function.

Alternatively

Add !ReportUtils.isArchivedRoom(props.report) check here

App/src/components/MoneyReportHeader.tsx

Line 72 in 632b1f8

const shouldShowSettlementButton = shouldShowPayButton || shouldShowApproveButton;

Or add the check here:

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Line 740 in ffb7c5e

function isSettled(reportID: string | undefined): boolean {

[Krishna2323]

Proposal Updated

[rojiphil]

Proposal

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

When the approval mode is set to Submit and Close, submitting an Expense Report shows the Approve button.

What is the root cause of that problem?

The root cause is that we have not yet handled the Submit and Close approval mode when the report is submitted.

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

To begin with, we need to handle the Submit and Close approval mode while submitting the report here. For this, we can set the statusNum to CLOSED and stateNum to APPROVED if the approval mode is Submit and Close like this here. This will ensure compliance with offline pattern.

const isSubmitAndClosePolicy = PolicyUtils.isSubmitAndClose(policy);
…
stateNum: isSubmitAndClosePolicy ? CONST.REPORT.STATE_NUM.APPROVED : CONST.REPORT.STATE_NUM.SUBMITTED,
statusNum: isSubmitAndClosePolicy ? CONST.REPORT.STATUS_NUM.CLOSED : CONST.REPORT.STATUS_NUM.SUBMITTED,

Also, we need to optimistically generate the next step for the submitted state only when it is not in the Submit and Close approval mode. This is because BE does not display the submitted next step for Submit and Close approval mode.

Further, we decide on whether Approve button is required to be displayed or not here. Here, additionally, we also have to check if the report is in an approved and closed state like this here

const isArchivedReport = ReportUtils.isArchivedRoom(report);
return isCurrentUserManager && !isOpenExpenseReport && !isApproved && !iouSettled && !isArchivedReport;

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[melvin-bot]

@slafortune Huh... This is 4 days overdue. Who can take care of this?

[slafortune]

Submit and close should not/doesn't need to show the Approve button - Adding to #wavecollect

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01d56509b7da773540

[melvin-bot]

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

[allgandalf]

Proposal

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

What is the root cause of that problem?

Note

The question here is not whether one can approve the IOU report or not, but it is to show the Approve button or not, canApproveIOU is the ability of the admin/employee to approve the policy request

For shouldShowApproveButton we forget to check whether the room is archived or not:

App/src/components/MoneyReportHeader.tsx

Line 70 in 632b1f8

const shouldShowApproveButton = useMemo(() => IOU.canApproveIOU(moneyRequestReport, chatReport, policy), [moneyRequestReport, chatReport, policy]);

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

Update shouldShowApproveButton as follows to check if the policy is archived or not:

const shouldShowApproveButton = useMemo(() => IOU.canApproveIOU(moneyRequestReport, chatReport, policy) 
- , [moneyRequestReport, chatReport, policy]);
+ && !ReportUtils.isArchivedRoom(moneyRequestReport), [moneyRequestReport, chatReport, policy]);

Note

We don't need to update shouldShowPayButton as the util used over there already checks for archived policies and returns false accordingly, Also adding the archive check at shouldShowSettlementButton would not have any effect and the approve button would still be seen as shouldShowApproveButton and shouldShowSettlementButton are both used for different purposes, Also shouldShowSettlementButton will automatically become false if the workspace is archived if we make shouldShowApproveButton false as well.

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

[Ollyws]

Couldn't get to these today but will review tomorrow.

[allgandalf]

friendly bump @Ollyws for review :)

[Ollyws]

As far as I can see, the report is immediately archived by the backend when the report is submitted meaning all we have to do here is hide the approve button for archived reports.

@rojiphil Could you expand on why your changes to submitReport would be necessary here?

[rojiphil]

Could you expand on why your changes to submitReport would be necessary here?

@Ollyws I agree that the report gets archived immediately by BE when the report is submitted in Submit and Close approval mode. But that's when it is online. When offline, changes to submitReport would be necessary to ensure that the app behaves as expected in Submit and Close approval mode. Hope this answer your query.

[Ollyws]

@rojiphil But the report is archived agnostically, I can't see a situation in which the changes to submitReport would be necessary but maybe I'm missing something?

[rojiphil]

But the report is archived agnostically, I can't see a situation in which the changes to submitReport would be necessary but maybe I'm missing something?

@Ollyws Sorry. I could have done better in communication here. I think changes to submitReport become necessary when the submitter and approver are the same user. Here is a test video for the same. Let me know if this is still not clear.

38229-Issue.mp4

[Ollyws]

Ah yes thanks for clearing that up.
@rojiphil's proposal LGTM.

🎀👀🎀 C+ reviewed

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[robertjchen]

Thanks for the discussion, and I also agree with the proposal 👍

[melvin-bot]

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

Offer link
Upwork job

[melvin-bot]

📣 @rojiphil 🎉 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 📖

[rojiphil]

@Ollyws PR is ready for review.

[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 1.4.60-13 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• 38229 hide approve on submit and close #39071

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-04-15. 🎊

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

• @rojiphil requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)
• @Ollyws requires payment automatic offer (Reviewer)

[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:

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

[Ollyws]

BugZero Checklist:

• The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:

This wasn't introduced by any PR we just hadn't yet handled the 'Submit and close' approval mode on the front-end.

• 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:

N/A

• 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:

N/A

• Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.

Yes.

• 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.

Regression Test Proposal

Precondition: Create a collect workspace with Submit and Close approval mode.

1. [Employee]: Create a money request in the Collect workspace.
2. [Admin]: Navigate to the workspace chat with the employee
3. [Admin]: Verify that the report preview is seen with Submit button for the money request created in step 1.
4. [Admin]: Click on Submit button.
5. [Admin]: Verify that Approve button is not displayed in the report preview (Test 1)
6. [Admin]: Navigate to the expense report
7. [Admin]: Verify that the expense report header does not show Approve button (Test 2)
8. [Admin]: Verify that the expense report footer shows that it is archived. (Test 3)

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[slafortune]

@rojiphil Contributor PAID
@Ollyws Reviewer PAID