[$1000] [HOLD for payment 2023-05-23] [Manual Requests] Fix participants on the IOUConfirmation page in the case when an admin requests money from the workspace

[mountiny]

Coming from #18215 (comment)

When admin requests money from their workspace as a employee, all the other members of the workspace are shown as participants on the confirmation page when the request is being made

Repro steps

1. Create a workspace as userA (the admin).
2. Invite userB
3. Navigate to your own workspace chat as userA
4. Tap + > Request Money > enter an amount > next
5. Observe that the list of participants displayed underneath To are %workspaceName% & userB on the confirmation screen.

Note: The bug only occurs when the admin of the workspace requests money in their own workspace chat. In the above example, if userB requested money in their own workspaceChat, then the To would only show the %workspaceName% as is expected:

cc @luacmartins @Julesssss

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~019f72dca339218ee5
• Upwork Job ID: 1661757492474519552
• Last Price Increase: 2023-05-25

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Bug0 Triage Checklist (Main S/O)

• This "bug" occurs on a supported platform (ensure Platforms in OP are ✅)
• This bug is not a duplicate report (check E/App issues and #expensify-bugs)
  • If it is, comment with a link to the original report, close the issue and add any novel details to the original issue instead
• This bug is reproducible using the reproduction steps in the OP. S/O
  • If the reproduction steps are clear and you're unable to reproduce the bug, check with the reporter and QA first, then close the issue.
  • If the reproduction steps aren't clear and you determine the correct steps, please update the OP.
• This issue is filled out as thoroughly and clearly as possible
  • Pay special attention to the title, results, platforms where the bug occurs, and if the bug happens on staging/production.
• I have reviewed and subscribed to the linked Slack conversation to ensure Slack/Github stay in sync

[s77rt]

When admin requests money from their workspace as a employee, they are shown as a participant in the IOU preview same as the workspace which is incorrect.

Just a clarification, the admin is not shown as participant, the other members are.

[mountiny]

Assinged @trjExpensify for payments and @s77rt to fix this

[trjExpensify]

Dope! @s77rt to confirm, are these the repro steps?

1. Create a workspace as userA (the admin).
2. Invite userB
3. As userA request money in your own workspace chat
4. Click on the IOUPreview in the chat
5. Observe that the list of participants underneath To: are WorkspaceName & userB

Also, the bug only occurs when the admin of the workspace requests money in their workspace chat. In the above example, if userB requested money in their own workspaceChat, would a list of all workspace members appear underneath the To as well?

[s77rt]

@tjferriss Yes, correct, but not need to finish the request process you can see that the participant list is incorrect at the confirmation step.

As userB the participants list only contains the workspace (no other members) which is the expected behaviour.

Checking now, will post more info asap

[Julesssss]

The screenshot doesn't align with the issue.

[trjExpensify]

Poor TJ man, always getting pinged for @trjExpensify. 😅 😂

Yes, correct, but not need to finish the request process you can see that the participant list is incorrect at the confirmation step.

Ah okay, got it. I've updated the steps and added them to the OP for posterity.

[trjExpensify]

The screenshot doesn't align with the issue.

Yeah, the title of this issue is also wrong. Look at the video it's on the IOUConfirmation screen #18215 (comment)

[trjExpensify]

Checking now, will post more info asap

Any luck @s77rt? (If there's a slack thread somewhere for this I missed, feel free to point me to it).

[s77rt]

a sec.. writing 😁

[s77rt]

Problem

• The issue is only reproducible on admin account because we create policy expense chats only for the admin. I'm not sure if this is intended or not. cc @bondydaa since you worked on Optimistically create policy expense chats for new members of workspaces #16764.
• We get many participants on admin due to the above note. And also because we are not filtering the reports properly on getPolicyExpenseReportOptions. But I'm not sure why we are filtering the policyExpenseReports in the first place. Why don't we just verify the passed report itself. Is there any cases where this function would return an array with more than 1 report? cc @cristipaval since you worked on Workspaces in money request modal #17132.

Solution

I think the straightforward solution is to filter the report based on isOwnPolicyExpenseChat to differentiate between the workspace report and the other policy expense reports.

diff (may change based on point 2)

diff --git a/src/libs/OptionsListUtils.js b/src/libs/OptionsListUtils.js
index 83a0b53b40..6dceeb3308 100644
--- a/src/libs/OptionsListUtils.js
+++ b/src/libs/OptionsListUtils.js
@@ -100,26 +100,21 @@ Onyx.connect({
  * @returns {Array}
  */
 function getPolicyExpenseReportOptions(report) {
-    if (!ReportUtils.isPolicyExpenseChat(report)) {
-        return [];
-    }
-    const filteredPolicyExpenseReports = _.filter(policyExpenseReports, (policyExpenseReport) => policyExpenseReport.policyID === report.policyID);
-    return _.map(filteredPolicyExpenseReports, (expenseReport) => {
-        const policyExpenseChatAvatarSource = ReportUtils.getWorkspaceAvatar(expenseReport);
-        return {
-            ...expenseReport,
-            keyForList: expenseReport.policyID,
-            text: expenseReport.displayName,
+    return [
+        {
+            ...report,
+            keyForList: report.policyID,
+            text: report.displayName,
             alternateText: Localize.translateLocal('workspace.common.workspace'),
             icons: [
                 {
-                    source: policyExpenseChatAvatarSource,
-                    name: expenseReport.displayName,
+                    source: ReportUtils.getWorkspaceAvatar(report),
+                    name: report.displayName,
                     type: CONST.ICON_TYPE_WORKSPACE,
                 },
             ],
-        };
-    });
+        },
+    ];
 }
 
 /**
diff --git a/src/pages/iou/MoneyRequestModal.js b/src/pages/iou/MoneyRequestModal.js
index b1bfb9f1ff..abee99e4e9 100644
--- a/src/pages/iou/MoneyRequestModal.js
+++ b/src/pages/iou/MoneyRequestModal.js
@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ const MoneyRequestModal = (props) => {
     const [previousStepIndex, setPreviousStepIndex] = useState(-1);
     const [currentStepIndex, setCurrentStepIndex] = useState(0);
     const [selectedOptions, setSelectedOptions] = useState(
-        ReportUtils.isPolicyExpenseChat(props.report)
+        ReportUtils.isPolicyExpenseChat(props.report) && props.report.isOwnPolicyExpenseChat
             ? OptionsListUtils.getPolicyExpenseReportOptions(props.report)
             : OptionsListUtils.getParticipantsOptions(props.report, props.personalDetails),
     );

[trjExpensify]

because we create policy expense chats only for the admin

Are you saying that a policyExpenseChat ("Workspace chat") doesn't get created for anyone other than an admin on the workspace? 🤔 I would find that very strange if it was the case. Every member of a workspace should have a workspace chat.

[mountiny]

The issue is only reproducible on admin account because we create policy expense chats only for the admin. I'm not sure if this is intended or not.

They are created, maybe the optimistic part does not work smoothly but they are being created for sure

I dont think your solution is ideal in this case, the problem is that the getPolicyExpenseReportOptions returns all the options for the user and its intended for the use in the Participants selection view. But we also use the results in here for the confirmation page and we check if the user is not same. Its honestly a bit confusing as its set to the state

I think there is an easier fix, making PR

[s77rt]

@trjExpensify @mountiny I'm not referring to the main workspace chat. This is created for all. I'm referring to the other member-2-member policy chats. The ones with avatar of workspace visible under member avatars. Those only exist for the admin.

[trjExpensify]

Ah, I see. That's still a policyExpenseChat workspace chat, it just has a different title for the admin, as it's not their own. 👍

@mountiny put a PR up with the fix for this, do you want to take a look through that?

[s77rt]

@trjExpensify Right, but for members there seems to be only one policyExpenseChat. The PR looks good, just discussing some more details in Slack. Will get to that asap.

Hey I tagged you correctly twice in a row. That's an achievement 😅 🎉

[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 1.3.14-14 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Make sure when admin request from its workspace the participants are correctly listed #18717

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-05-23. 🎊

After the hold period is over and BZ checklist items are completed, please complete any of the applicable payments for this issue, and check them off once done.

• External issue reporter
• Contributor that fixed the issue
• Contributor+ that helped on the issue and/or PR

As a reminder, here are the bonuses/penalties that should be applied for any External issue:

• Merged PR within 3 business days of assignment - 50% bonus
• Merged PR more than 9 business days after assignment - 50% penalty

[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:

• [@s77rt] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@s77rt] 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:
• [@s77rt] 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:
• [@s77rt] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@s77rt] 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.
• [@trjExpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[s77rt]

• The PR that introduced the bug has been identified: Workspaces in money request modal #17132
• The offending PR has been commented on: Workspaces in money request modal #17132 (comment)
• A discussion in #expensify-bugs has been started: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1684325139874209
• Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug: No

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~019f72dca339218ee5

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @trjExpensify is eligible for the External assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @s77rt is eligible for the External assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @mountiny is eligible for the External assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @s77rt is eligible for the Internal assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[trjExpensify]

Alrighty, @s77rt sent you an offer on this job for $1,000 for the C+ review.

[s77rt]

I'm not sure if I am eligible for payment here as I didn't get to finish the reviewer checklist.

[mountiny]

I think we can do a partial $250 because there was no checklist but you have helped. Does that work?

[s77rt]

Sounds good!

[s77rt]

@trjExpensify Can you please adjust the offer?

[trjExpensify]

Yep, done!

[s77rt]

@trjExpensify Accepted! Thanks!

[trjExpensify]

Settled up!