[HOLD for payment 2023-11-13] [HOLD for payment 2023-10-30] [$500] Update LHN/chat header to handle displayName not being set

[puneetlath]

We are going to stop sending a display name from the back-end in certain scenarios. In those scenarios, we should fall back on using "Hidden" in the LHN and Chat Header (and anywhere else that relies on display name being set).

Let's update any place that expects a display name to fall back on the primary login. And if there is neither a displayName or a primary login, to fall back on "Hidden".

Issue reported by: @parasharrajat
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1694550580877519

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~011dd93c0b122cf21f
• Upwork Job ID: 1715060740724056064
• Last Price Increase: 2023-10-19

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @puneetlath is eligible for the NewFeature assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[hungvu193]

Proposal

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

Update LHN/chat header to handle displayName not being set

What is the root cause of that problem?

We're still returning empty string incase we don't have the value for shortName and longName.

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.js

Lines 1099 to 1107 in d68263a

	function getDisplayNameForParticipant(accountID, shouldUseShortForm = false) {
	if (!accountID) {
	return '';
	}
	const personalDetails = getPersonalDetailsForAccountID(accountID);
	const longName = personalDetails.displayName;
	const shortName = personalDetails.firstName || longName;
	return shouldUseShortForm ? shortName : longName;
	}

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

We can add more condition if both of these values are empty, we should use primaryLogin or "Hidden":

    if (_.isEmpty(longName) && _.isEmpty(shortName)) {
        return personalDetails.login || Localize.translate("common.hidden");
    }
    return shouldUseShortForm ? shortName : longName;

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

[lukemorawski]

@puneetlath It's Lucas from Callstack. Happy to work on that. Just wanted to clarify one thing. By fallback to "Hidden" you mean displaying a text "Hidden" in the header and LHN?

[puneetlath]

Yes, exactly. Let's have the text "Hidden" be the final fallback text whenever we use display names and aren't able to find either a display name or a login.

[lukemorawski]

@puneetlath How can I create an account with no display name, to test that change?

[puneetlath]

We chatted in Slack, but this will only be testable by adding fake data in Onyx or removing data from an existing user.

[sakluger]

This issue was reported by @parasharrajat before @puneetlath created this issue. I've added the Slack thread where the issue was reported so that @parasharrajat can be paid out the reporting bonus.

[melvin-bot]

This issue has not been updated in over 15 days. @puneetlath, @lukemorawski eroding to Monthly issue.

P.S. Is everyone reading this sure this is really a near-term priority? Be brave: if you disagree, go ahead and close it out. If someone disagrees, they'll reopen it, and if they don't: one less thing to do!

[melvin-bot]

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

[parasharrajat]

This is missing an external label.

[puneetlath]

Does that also handle adding back the previous changes that were reverted?

[lukemorawski]

Ah, dang it, they reverted themselves after I resolved a conflict against "main" branch! Such a noob thing to do 🤦‍♂️ Give me a moment while I'll bring 'em back.

[puneetlath]

Haha all good! Git is fun 😅

[lukemorawski]

@puneetlath updated the latest PR with all the changes!

[puneetlath]

Great!

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

[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 1.3.95-9 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Update LHN/chat header to handle displayName not being set - MR participants list fix #30342

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-11-13. 🎊

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

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

• @mananjadhav does not require payment (Eligible for Manual Requests)
• @lukemorawski does not require payment (Contractor)

[melvin-bot]

BugZero Checklist: The PR adding this new feature has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed:

• [@mananjadhav] Please propose regression test steps to ensure the new feature will work correctly on production in further releases.
• [@puneetlath] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @mananjadhav Please request via NewDot manual requests for the Reviewer role ($500)

[melvin-bot]

📣 @allroundexperts Please request via NewDot manual requests for the Contributor role ($500)

[puneetlath]

Note to self: both @mananjadhav and @allroundexperts were involved in PR review here. Will need to figure out compensation.

[0xmiros]

Just to clarify
First attempt: #27547 caused #30032, #30022
2nd attempt: #30342 caused #30846, #30847

[puneetlath]

Payment Summary:

• @parasharrajat reporter - $50
• @mananjadhav C+ first PR - $500
• @allroundexperts C+ second PR - $500

Please both request on NewDot.

[JmillsExpensify]

$500 payment approved for @mananjadhav based on summary above.

[JmillsExpensify]

$500 payment approved for @allroundexperts based on summary above.

[parasharrajat]

Looks like, we missed the reporting bonus for me here. @puneetlath Could you please add that to the payment summary? Thanks.

[puneetlath]

Whoops, sorry about that. Updated @parasharrajat

[parasharrajat]

Payment requested as per #27393 (comment)

[JmillsExpensify]

$50 payment approved for @parasharrajat based on this comment.