[HOLD for payment 2024-07-24] [$250] Review duplicates - "Unhold" option appears for expenses that are pending duplicate reviews

[izarutskaya]

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: 9.0.4-0
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: Y
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 workspace chat.
3. Submit two expenses with the same amount and merchant.
4. Go to transaction thread of any expense.
5. After Review duplicates button appears, click on the report header.
6. Click Unhold.

Expected Result:

"Unhold" option should be appear for expenses that are pending review for duplicates.

Actual Result:

"Unhold" option appeara for expenses that are pending review for duplicates.
Clicking Unhold does not unhold the expense.

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

Bug6533175_1720102978084.20240704_221038.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01e9c4febbfea1864e
• Upwork Job ID: 1810654131699118867
• Last Price Increase: 2024-07-09
• Automatic offers:
• ahmedGaber93 | Reviewer | 103060862

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @zanyrenney

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @zanyrenney (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.

[izarutskaya]

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

[bernhardoj]

Proposal

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

Unhold option shows for duplicated expense.

What is the root cause of that problem?

Duplicated expense is considered a hold too.

App/src/libs/TransactionUtils.ts

Lines 678 to 684 in c5eafd3

	function isOnHold(transaction: OnyxEntry<Transaction>): boolean {
	if (!transaction) {
	return false;
	}
	return !!transaction.comment?.hold || isDuplicate(transaction.transactionID, true);
	}

And the unhold option will show if the expense is on hold. But it's not really a "hold", so doing an unhold request won't remove the duplicate violation.

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

Don't allow unhold if it's hold because of duplicate expenses violation.

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Line 2832 in c5eafd3

const canUnholdRequest = !!(canHoldOrUnholdRequest && isOnHold && (isRequestHoldCreator || (!isRequestIOU && canModifyStatus))) && !!transaction?.reimbursable;

(isOnHold && !TransactionUtils.isDuplicate(transaction.transactionID, true))

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Keep showing the unhold option, but when pressed, do the same action as "Review duplicates" button, that is open the review duplicates page,

[melvin-bot]

@zanyrenney Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

[zanyrenney]

changing to collect actually.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01e9c4febbfea1864e

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @ahmedGaber93 (External)

[zanyrenney]

hey @ahmedGaber93 please can you review the proposal above from @bernhardoj

[ahmedGaber93]

Reviewing today

[ahmedGaber93]

@bernhardoj's proposal LGTM!
I agree "we shouldn't allow unhold if it's hold because of duplicate expenses violation" because unhold action will not affect on anything as it is not a real hold with transaction.comment?.hold value

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

📣 @ahmedGaber93 🎉 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

[bernhardoj]

PR is ready

cc: @ahmedGaber93

[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:

• Don't show unhold for expense that is hold because of duplicate #45148

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

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

• @ahmedGaber93 requires payment automatic offer (Reviewer)
• @bernhardoj requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests

[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:

• [@ahmedGaber93] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@ahmedGaber93] 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:
• [@ahmedGaber93] 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:
• [@ahmedGaber93] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@ahmedGaber93] 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.
• [@zanyrenney] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[ahmedGaber93]

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:

• [@ahmedGaber93] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: feat: surfacing potential duplicates #40153
• [@ahmedGaber93] 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: https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/40153/files#r1685718142
• [@ahmedGaber93] 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
• [@ahmedGaber93] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@ahmedGaber93] 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. Yes

Regression Test Proposal

1. Submit 2 expenses with the same amount and merchant to a workspace
2. Open the transaction thread of the duplicated expense
3. Press the chat header
4. Verify there is no "Unhold" option

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[bernhardoj]

Requested in ND.

[ahmedGaber93]

@zanyrenney Could you please pay out this when you have a chance?

[zanyrenney]

payment summary

@ahmedGaber93 requires payment automatic offer (Reviewer) - paid $250 via upwork.
@bernhardoj requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests - owed $250

[JmillsExpensify]

$250 approved for @bernhardoj