[HOLD for payment 2024-03-26] [$250] [Simplified Collect][More Features] Optimistically set defaults for Workflows if feature is disabled

[luacmartins]

Coming from this PR, we need to optimistically set the default values for the workspace if the workflows feature is disabled, i.e.

• Scheduled Submit (Delayed Submission) off (harvesting.enabled = false)
• No approvals (Submit & close) - approval mode OPTIONAL
• Reimbursement choice - reimburseNo

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @bfitzexpensify

[melvin-bot]

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

[nkdengineer]

Proposal

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

• Optimistically set defaults for Workflows if feature is disabled

What is the root cause of that problem?

• In here, when turning off the policy workflow, we do not has optimistic data for the related keys, for example, approvalMode, areWorkflowsEnabled, autoReporting, harvesting.enabled, reimbursement.choice.reimbursementChoice, ...

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

• We need to set the above optimistic data once we turn off policy workflow.

 const optimisticDataWhenDisabled = [
        {
            onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
            key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.POLICY}${policyID}`,
            value: {
                approvalMode: CONST.POLICY.APPROVAL_MODE.OPTIONAL,
                autoReporting: false,
                harvesting: {
                    enabled: false,
                },
                reimbursement: {choice: {reimbursementChoice: CONST.POLICY.REIMBURSEMENT_CHOICES.REIMBURSEMENT_NO}},
                reimbursementChoice: CONST.POLICY.REIMBURSEMENT_CHOICES.REIMBURSEMENT_NO,
            },
        },
    ];

• We can add the above optimistic data to the optimisticData in here if enabled: false

• If the API is called failed, update the failureData as well.

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

• NA

[nkdengineer]

@luacmartins Can a contributor work on this issue? I can open the PR in a day. Thanks

[mountiny]

@nkdengineer its a straightforward change, I will export this for $250

[melvin-bot]

Unable to auto-create job on Upwork. The BZ team member should create it manually for this issue.

[melvin-bot]

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

[mountiny]

No C+ review will be required

@nkdengineer please raise the Pr

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Could not update price automatically because there is no linked Upwork Job ID. The BZ team member will need to update the price manually in Upwork.

[nkdengineer]

I am working on the PR

[nkdengineer]

@luacmartins PR #38432 is ready to review

[mountiny]

PR merged, thanks for a quick work

@bfitzexpensify this will be $250 to @nkdengineer, no C+ this time

[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 1.4.54-4 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: add optimistic data once disable workflow #38432

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-03-26. 🎊

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

• @nkdengineer requires payment (Needs manual offer from BZ)

[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:

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

[luacmartins]

I think we can skip the checklist since this feature was still in development when the bug was repoerted.

[luacmartins]

Just pending payment.

[bfitzexpensify]

Sweet - @nkdengineer, can you apply here? https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0132d6d738f448da5d

[mountiny]

@nkdengineer Is this completed?

[bfitzexpensify]

Bump @nkdengineer - can you apply to the Upwork job so we can finalise payment?

[bfitzexpensify]

Bumping in Slack

[nkdengineer]

Bump @nkdengineer - can you apply to the Upwork job so we can finalise payment?

@bfitzexpensify I applied, thanks a lot!

[bfitzexpensify]

Payment complete, closing this one out.