feat: Expense Tracking in the Workspace Chat #39239

paultsimura · 2024-03-29T13:14:04Z

Details

This PR enables tracking expenses within the Workspace money reports.

Fixed Issues

$ #38971
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

Same as QA

Offline tests

Same as QA

QA Steps

Go to your own policy expense chat where you don't have an active expense report
Click "+" -> Track expense -> proceed with amount of $10
Verify a Report Preview was created with title "{user} spent: $10"
Open the Expense report
Verify the total shows $10
Click "+" -> Request money -> proceed with $5
Verify the total now shows a separation:
- Total: $15
- Out-of-pocket spend: $5
- Company spend: $10
Click "+" -> Track expense -> proceed with amount of $5
Verify the total now shows a separation:
- Total: $20
- Out-of-pocket spend: $5
- Company spend: $15
Click "Submit"
Click "Approve"
Verify a message
Verify the settlement button now says "Pay $5 ..."
Click "Pay elsewhere"
Verify it says "Paid $5 ..."

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

android20.52.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

chrome20.45.mp4

iOS: Native

Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.Max.-.2024-04-01.at.20.26.5220.28.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.Max.-.2024-04-01.at.20.37.5120.38.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-04-01.at.19.46.3119.47.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2024-04-01.at.19.57.2519.58.mp4

paultsimura · 2024-03-29T13:15:04Z

I've created this draft PR to start tracking the existing issues that are blocking the PR, but are not directly related to it.

paultsimura · 2024-03-29T13:19:22Z

First of all, the App is crashing because of the Shortcut feature – it doesn't support the TRACK_* actions.
I need to get copies for the Shortcut button for the following actions:

trackManual
trackScan
trackDistance

@thienlnam could you please help with adding the corresponding label or tagging relevant people?

paultsimura · 2024-03-29T13:25:52Z

Another issue – the removal doesn't work as expected. It removes the action optimistically, but after a refresh, the action reappears as a skeleton, and the transaction thread exists, but with an empty transaction.

@shubham1206agra is it known from the times you implemented the self-dm tracking?

Screen.Recording.2024-03-29.at.14.20.2114.22.mp4

shubham1206agra · 2024-03-29T13:30:33Z

Yes it's a known issue
@thienlnam is working on this

paultsimura · 2024-03-29T13:50:26Z

A couple more things I'd like to clarify:

First – there is no visual difference between the tracking expense (1st) and the actual money request (2nd) – do we want to change it?

Second – I'd like to know more about the expected total separation.

Do I understand correctly that adding a Tracking Expense inside an Expense Report should increase the Total and Company spend, but not the Out-of-pocket spend?
When there are no other money requests, only a tracking one, it will look like this (showing only Total), are we ok with this?

shubham1206agra · 2024-03-29T14:31:18Z

First – there is no visual difference between the tracking expense (1st) and the actual money request (2nd) – do we want to change it?

No, as we don't have any such thing in docs. But let me summon @Expensify/design so that they can chime in.

shubham1206agra · 2024-03-29T14:37:14Z

Do I understand correctly that adding a Tracking Expense inside an Expense Report should increase the Total and Company spend, but not the Out-of-pocket spend?

This is a non-reimbursable expense. That's why it will behave like this.

shubham1206agra · 2024-03-29T14:37:43Z

When there are no other money requests, only a tracking one, it will look like this (showing only Total), are we ok with this?

Not sure. @thienlnam can confirm this.

paultsimura · 2024-03-29T14:41:02Z

One more thing that bothers me is the Report Preview text.

Currently, if the total looks like this:

The preview will show plainly "Spent $total":

Is there any design for what we should show in such cases (when there are reimbursable and non-reimbursable requests combined)?

shubham1206agra · 2024-03-29T14:42:29Z

Again @Expensify/design can help here.

dannymcclain · 2024-03-29T14:57:36Z

Hmm, I'm really curious for the other designer's thoughts on these.

First – there is no visual difference between the tracking expense (1st) and the actual money request (2nd) – do we want to change it?

For this one, I could maybe see editing the Cash line or maybe just adding a dot separator and appending something there to make it more clear? I'm not sure.

Is there any design for what we should show in such cases (when there are reimbursable and non-reimbursable requests combined)?

This one has me kinda stumped. I don't know that we want to change the preview behavior or create a custom preview for tracked expenses, so I'm not sure if there's a good solution for this.

@Expensify/design any ideas?

shawnborton · 2024-03-29T15:41:24Z

First – there is no visual difference between the tracking expense (1st) and the actual money request (2nd) – do we want to change it?

Correct - whether you track a personal expense or send someone a money request, they are both just expenses under the hood and they would look the same at the expense level.

Do I understand correctly that adding a Tracking Expense inside an Expense Report should increase the Total and Company spend, but not the Out-of-pocket spend?

I don't understand why we are handling it this way. If you add an expense to a report, it just increases the total. The "Company spend" vs "Out of pocket spend" is just a nicer way of saying "Is this expense reimburseable or not?"

Unless I am missing something. Did the GH issue or design doc specify otherwise?

When there are no other money requests, only a tracking one, it will look like this (showing only Total), are we ok with this?

Yes. We already have existing patterns for what expenses look like when they are added to a workspace, so we just follow what we currently have.

@thienlnam can you also chime in here? Seems like maybe there is some misunderstanding going on.

paultsimura · 2024-03-29T17:22:44Z

The "Company spend" vs "Out of pocket spend" is just a nicer way of saying "Is this expense reimburseable or not?"

Yes, from what I understood.

paultsimura · 2024-03-30T15:51:25Z

One more BE issue related to money request removal:

Have both non- and reimbursable requests in one Money report
Remove the reimbursable one
Observe that for a moment, the optimistic total is correct
When the DeleteMoneyRequest response comes, see that the total becomes 0
After refreshing the page, see that the total is back to normal.

The DeleteMoneyRequest API returns the iouReport.total: 0 and iouReport.unheldTotal: 0 – this needs to be fixed.

Screen.Recording.2024-03-30.at.16.46.2716.47.mp4

melvin-bot · 2024-03-30T22:01:44Z

@shubham1206agra Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

paultsimura · 2024-03-30T22:03:33Z

@shubham1206agra you can start the preliminary testing (just please be aware that the current main has the regular money request flow broken).
I will fill out the checklist by Monday.

shubham1206agra · 2024-04-01T12:14:20Z

@paultsimura @Expensify/design Should we show paid sign to non-reimbursable request?

shawnborton · 2024-04-01T12:41:10Z

Hmm did the user take any action to trigger that state? Like did the user mark the report as Paid? If so, then yes.

shubham1206agra · 2024-04-01T12:42:46Z

Yes, I used Pay elsewhere on the report.

paultsimura · 2024-04-03T20:03:28Z

@thienlnam this must be a single-transaction Expense Report.
The thing that's failing is the removal of Expense Report, which is not triggered when there are other money requests in it (in your video there are 3 of them)

thienlnam · 2024-04-03T22:32:33Z

Ah gotcha, this seems to happen for regular requests as well - I will create an issue to track it

paultsimura · 2024-04-03T22:57:08Z

Ah gotcha, this seems to happen for regular requests as well - I will create an issue to track it

Thanks, I will double check tomorrow if I can fix the skeleton bug without this BE fix

# Conflicts: # src/pages/home/report/ReportActionsView.tsx

paultsimura · 2024-04-04T11:03:25Z

this seems to happen for regular requests as well

I couldn't reproduce for the regular ones 🤔

paultsimura · 2024-04-04T11:56:20Z

I managed to localize the issue more:

It comes from feat: Expense Tracking in the Workspace Chat #39239 (comment) – @thienlnam should have a tracking issue for that – the IOU Report is not properly deleted when removing the only money request within it.
The empty REPORTPREVIEW action reappears after the OpenReport API call, but the linked IOU Report is absent in Onyx.
There are 2 scenarios from here:
a. Click the empty preview, so the IOU Report gets loaded into Onyx – in this case, creating a new Tracking Expense works well
b. Do not open the empty preview, so the empty IOU Report is still null – in this case, creating a new Tracking Expense causes the skeleton view.

An observation: the TrackExpense API response turns the empty IOU preview into a "deleted" empty action:

However, it doesn't re-link the new report preview action with the action that came before the deleted empty preview. As a result, this function, which builds the report actions list by linking them via previousReportActionID, returns a single report action, which causes the skeleton:

App/src/libs/ReportActionsUtils.ts

Lines 281 to 340 in 20be55b

    
           /** 
        
            * Returns the largest gapless range of reportActions including a the provided reportActionID, where a "gap" is defined as a reportAction's `previousReportActionID` not matching the previous reportAction in the sortedReportActions array. 
        
            * See unit tests for example of inputs and expected outputs. 
        
            * Note: sortedReportActions sorted in descending order 
        
            */ 
        
           function getContinuousReportActionChain(sortedReportActions: ReportAction[], id?: string): ReportAction[] { 
        
               let index; 
        
               if (id) { 
        
                   index = sortedReportActions.findIndex((reportAction) => reportAction.reportActionID === id); 
        
               } else { 
        
                   index = sortedReportActions.findIndex( 
        
                       (reportAction) => 
        
                           reportAction.pendingAction !== CONST.RED_BRICK_ROAD_PENDING_ACTION.ADD && 
        
                           reportAction.pendingAction !== CONST.RED_BRICK_ROAD_PENDING_ACTION.DELETE && 
        
                           !reportAction.isOptimisticAction, 
        
                   ); 
        
               } 
        
               if (index === -1) { 
        
                   // if no non-pending action is found, that means all actions on the report are optimistic 
        
                   // in this case, we'll assume the whole chain of reportActions is continuous and return it in its entirety 
        
                   return id ? [] : sortedReportActions; 
        
               } 
        
               let startIndex = index; 
        
               let endIndex = index; 
        
               // Iterate forwards through the array, starting from endIndex. This loop checks the continuity of actions by: 
        
               // 1. Comparing the current item's previousReportActionID with the next item's reportActionID. 
        
               //    This ensures that we are moving in a sequence of related actions from newer to older. 
        
               while ( 
        
                   (endIndex < sortedReportActions.length - 1 && sortedReportActions[endIndex].previousReportActionID === sortedReportActions[endIndex + 1].reportActionID) || 
        
                   !!sortedReportActions[endIndex + 1]?.whisperedToAccountIDs?.length || 
        
                   !!sortedReportActions[endIndex]?.whisperedToAccountIDs?.length || 
        
                   sortedReportActions[endIndex]?.actionName === CONST.REPORT.ACTIONS.TYPE.ROOMCHANGELOG.INVITE_TO_ROOM || 
        
                   sortedReportActions[endIndex + 1]?.actionName === CONST.REPORT.ACTIONS.TYPE.CLOSED || 
        
                   sortedReportActions[endIndex + 1]?.actionName === CONST.REPORT.ACTIONS.TYPE.CREATED 
        
               ) { 
        
                   endIndex++; 
        
               } 
        
               // Iterate backwards through the sortedReportActions, starting from startIndex. This loop has two main checks: 
        
               // 1. It compares the current item's reportActionID with the previous item's previousReportActionID. 
        
               //    This is to ensure continuity in a sequence of actions. 
        
               // 2. If the first condition fails, it then checks if the previous item has a pendingAction of 'add'. 
        
               //    This additional check is to include recently sent messages that might not yet be part of the established sequence. 
        
               while ( 
        
                   (startIndex > 0 && sortedReportActions[startIndex].reportActionID === sortedReportActions[startIndex - 1].previousReportActionID) || 
        
                   sortedReportActions[startIndex - 1]?.pendingAction === CONST.RED_BRICK_ROAD_PENDING_ACTION.ADD || 
        
                   sortedReportActions[startIndex - 1]?.pendingAction === CONST.RED_BRICK_ROAD_PENDING_ACTION.DELETE || 
        
                   // eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/prefer-nullish-coalescing 
        
                   sortedReportActions[startIndex - 1]?.isOptimisticAction || 
        
                   sortedReportActions[startIndex - 1]?.actionName === CONST.REPORT.ACTIONS.TYPE.ROOMCHANGELOG.INVITE_TO_ROOM 
        
               ) { 
        
                   startIndex--; 
        
               } 
        
               return sortedReportActions.slice(startIndex, endIndex + 1); 
        
           }

My suggestion is to fix the Expense Report removal on the BE side rather than find workarounds.

thienlnam · 2024-04-04T15:57:10Z

Yeah I agree we shouldn't find a workaround from the FE side. However, it doesn't seem like a blocker so we can proceed here and then once the BE is fixed it should just work

paultsimura · 2024-04-05T20:59:47Z

@shubham1206agra the longer it takes to review & merge this PR – the more conflicts arise (new ones each day). As per the last comment, this PR should be ready for the final testing

# Conflicts: # tests/unit/ReportUtilsTest.ts

shubham1206agra · 2024-04-08T13:02:21Z

Reviewer Checklist

I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
- I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
- I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
- I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
- I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android: Native
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
- MacOS: Desktop
If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
- I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
- I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
- I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
- I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
- I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
- I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
- I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
- I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
- I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
If a new component is created I verified that:
- A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
- All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
- The file is named correctly
- The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
- The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
- For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
- Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
- All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
- The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
If any new file was added I verified that:
- The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
- A similar style doesn't already exist
- The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-04-08.at.6.38.56.PM.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-04-08.at.6.12.58.PM.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

shubham1206agra · 2024-04-08T13:03:30Z

@thienlnam The track is taking longer to fetch from BE. (Little confused here tbh)
cc @paultsimura

shubham1206agra

LGTM!

# Conflicts: # src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

thienlnam

Great - thanks!

thienlnam · 2024-04-08T18:19:26Z

Perf tests known to be failing

OSBotify · 2024-04-08T18:25:53Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

OSBotify · 2024-04-10T17:46:00Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.4.62-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅

OSBotify · 2024-04-10T17:54:53Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.4.62-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅

OSBotify · 2024-04-10T19:34:06Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.4.62-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅

MonilBhavsar · 2024-04-11T06:03:45Z

We seem to have a regression here #40067. If anyone can please take a look cc @paultsimura @shubham1206agra @thienlnam

paultsimura · 2024-04-11T06:04:39Z

I'm on it

OSBotify · 2024-04-18T04:31:51Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.4.62-17 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅

Fix the shortcut error

16af896

paultsimura added 5 commits March 30, 2024 16:58

Merge branch 'main' into feat/38971-tracking-expense

7de8f86

Workspace tracking – init

d64af58

Workspace tracking – handle total during removal

5d4908c

Handle track expense removal as a regular money request for non-self-dm

53a3b21

Build failureData for the track expense

7fb849d

paultsimura marked this pull request as ready for review March 30, 2024 22:01

paultsimura requested a review from a team as a code owner March 30, 2024 22:01

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team March 30, 2024 22:01

melvin-bot bot requested a review from shubham1206agra March 30, 2024 22:01

Handle the one-transaction view

5648804

Merge branch 'main' into feat/38971-tracking-expense

ff6e9e3

# Conflicts: # src/pages/home/report/ReportActionsView.tsx

paultsimura added 3 commits April 5, 2024 23:03

Merge branch 'main' into feat/38971-tracking-expense

7be2100

# Conflicts: # tests/unit/ReportUtilsTest.ts

Fix tests after TS migration

08c7dfb

Use generic error message

0a79c0d

shubham1206agra approved these changes Apr 8, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from thienlnam April 8, 2024 13:33

Merge branch 'main' into feat/38971-tracking-expense

cc3c52d

# Conflicts: # src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

thienlnam approved these changes Apr 8, 2024

View reviewed changes

thienlnam merged commit 6ec5811 into Expensify:main Apr 8, 2024
14 of 15 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Apr 10, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-04-10 #40026

Closed

m-natarajan mentioned this pull request Apr 10, 2024

[HOLD #40266] Track - LHN and expense preview show incorrect info when there is tracking and request #40043

Closed

6 tasks

bernhardoj mentioned this pull request Apr 11, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-04-25] Deleting a tracked expense hides all tracked expense #40067

Closed

6 tasks

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Apr 18, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-04-25] [$500] [Track Expense] Adding Track Expense to Workspace Chats #38971

Closed

feat: Expense Tracking in the Workspace Chat #39239

feat: Expense Tracking in the Workspace Chat #39239

Conversation

paultsimura commented Mar 29, 2024 • edited Loading

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

paultsimura commented Mar 29, 2024

paultsimura commented Mar 29, 2024

paultsimura commented Mar 29, 2024

shubham1206agra commented Mar 29, 2024

paultsimura commented Mar 29, 2024

shubham1206agra commented Mar 29, 2024

shubham1206agra commented Mar 29, 2024

shubham1206agra commented Mar 29, 2024

paultsimura commented Mar 29, 2024

shubham1206agra commented Mar 29, 2024

dannymcclain commented Mar 29, 2024

shawnborton commented Mar 29, 2024

paultsimura commented Mar 29, 2024

paultsimura commented Mar 30, 2024

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 30, 2024

paultsimura commented Mar 30, 2024

shubham1206agra commented Apr 1, 2024

shawnborton commented Apr 1, 2024

shubham1206agra commented Apr 1, 2024

paultsimura commented Apr 3, 2024

thienlnam commented Apr 3, 2024

paultsimura commented Apr 3, 2024

paultsimura commented Apr 4, 2024

paultsimura commented Apr 4, 2024

thienlnam commented Apr 4, 2024

paultsimura commented Apr 5, 2024

shubham1206agra commented Apr 8, 2024 • edited Loading

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

shubham1206agra commented Apr 8, 2024

shubham1206agra left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

thienlnam left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

thienlnam commented Apr 8, 2024

OSBotify commented Apr 8, 2024

OSBotify commented Apr 10, 2024

OSBotify commented Apr 10, 2024

OSBotify commented Apr 10, 2024

MonilBhavsar commented Apr 11, 2024

paultsimura commented Apr 11, 2024

OSBotify commented Apr 18, 2024

paultsimura commented Mar 29, 2024 •

edited

Loading

shubham1206agra commented Apr 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading