[HOLD for payment 2024-10-16] Search - Selected expense does not remain selected, gets auto deselected

[IuliiaHerets]

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: v9.0.45-2
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/5050173
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team

Action Performed:

Preconditions: Existing user with existing IOUs/Expenses

1. Open New Expensify app
2. Log in as user from preconditions
3. Tap on Search in the bottom
4. Tap and hold an Expense
5. Tap on Select

Expected Result:

Selected expense should be selected (it should be highlighted and it's checkbox should be checked)

Actual Result:

Expense is only briefly selected and then gets auto deselected.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

• Android: Native
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Native
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Bug6625431_1728131823120.IYGX8867.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @abekkala

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @abekkala (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.

[IuliiaHerets]

We think that this bug might be related to #wave-control

[jaydamani]

Proposal

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

Selected expense does not remain selected, gets auto deselected on narrow screens

What is the root cause of that problem?

This is caused by #49829

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

Revert #49829

[cretadn22]

Checking

[jaydamani]

@cretadn22 getSections is used to get data and it has 3 flows so it can return array of ReportActionListItemType or TransactionListItemType or ReportListItemType but your looping only handles case of ReportActionListItemType by checking the transactions field. You need to add below code here to handle TransactionListItemType as well. I think you can ignore ReportActionListItemType because it is only for chat search.

            if ('transactionID' in report) {
                if (!Object.keys(selectedTransactions).includes(report.transactionID)) {
                    return;
                }
                newTransactionList[report.transactionID] = {
                    action: report.action,
                    canHold: report.canHold,
                    canUnhold: report.canUnhold,
                    isSelected: selectedTransactions[report.transactionID].isSelected,
                    canDelete: report.canDelete,
                };
            }

Note: I have not completed my investigation but this change seems to work for now so please verify these details. Hopefully, this saves you some time.

[thienlnam]

Just need payment for C+ review here for @ishpaul777

[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 9.0.45-4 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Updated selected transaction If getting new updates (also fixed for cases where the status is set to ALL) #50347

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-10-14. 🎊

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

• @ishpaul777 requires payment (Needs manual offer from BZ)
• @cretadn22 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:

• [@ishpaul777] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@ishpaul777] 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:
• [@ishpaul777] 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:
• [@ishpaul777] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@ishpaul777] 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.
• [@abekkala] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[abekkala]

PAYMENT SUMMARY FOR OCT 16

• PR Review: @ishpaul777 [$250, if no regression] OFFER
  please complete checklist above

[thienlnam]

This was a regression, so only a payment for @ishpaul777 since it was a different C+ that reviewed this fix

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.0.46-5 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Updated selected transaction If getting new updates (also fixed for cases where the status is set to ALL) #50347

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-10-16. 🎊

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

• @ishpaul777 requires payment (Needs manual offer from BZ)
• @cretadn22 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:

• [@ishpaul777] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@ishpaul777] 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:
• [@ishpaul777] 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:
• [@ishpaul777] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@ishpaul777] 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.
• [@abekkala] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[abekkala]

cc: @OfstadC

PAYMENT SUMMARY FOR OCT 16

• no payment for fix, [regression]
• PR Review: @ishpaul777 [$250, if no regression] OFFER
  please complete checklist above

[OfstadC]

@ishpaul777 Could you please complete the BZ checklist? Thank you!

[melvin-bot]

Payment Summary

Upwork Job

• ROLE: @ishpaul777 paid $250 via Upwork
• ROLE: @cretadn22 (No payment issued per this)

BugZero Checklist (@OfstadC)

• I have verified the correct assignees and roles are listed above and updated the neccesary manual offers
• I have verified that there are no duplicate or incorrect contracts on Upwork for this job (https://www.upwork.com/ab/applicants//hired)
• I have paid out the Upwork contracts or cancelled the ones that are incorrect
• I have verified the payment summary above is correct

[ishpaul777]

[@ishpaul777] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: #49829
[@ishpaul777] 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/49829/files#r1803652659
[@ishpaul777] 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: Not required
[@ishpaul777] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug. No, this was found in Deploy QA process we should have tests covering this flow in App
[@ishpaul777] 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.