[HOLD for payment 2023-10-12] [HOLD for payment 2023-10-10] [$250] Settings - Green dot appears even though there is no Contact methods

[kbecciv]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Action Performed:

1. Go to Settings > Profile >Contact methods

Expected Result:

Green dot should not show

Actual Result:

Green dot appears even though there is no Contact methods

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?

• Android / native
• Android / Chrome
• iOS / native
• iOS / Safari
• MacOS / Chrome / Safari
• MacOS / Desktop

Version Number: 1.3.76.0
Reproducible in staging?: y
Reproducible in production?: n
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail:
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers):
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Notes/Photos/Videos: Any additional supporting documentation

Screen_Recording_20231002_163934_Chrome.mp4

Screen.Recording.2023-10-02.at.4.32.16.PM.1.mov

Screen.Recording.2023-10-02.at.4.28.38.PM.1.mov

Screen.Recording.2023-10-02.at.4.32.16.PM.mov

Screen_Recording_20231002_144610_New.Expensify.mp4

RPReplay_Final1696311735.MP4

RPReplay_Final1696311670.MP4

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @gadhiyamanan
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1696244310530339

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01932d440331606ba1
• Upwork Job ID: 1709131206782132224
• Last Price Increase: 2023-10-03
• Automatic offers:
• situchan | Contributor | 26995000
• gadhiyamanan | Reporter | 26995001

[OSBotify]

👋 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.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @marcaaron (Engineering), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4319 for more details.

[saranshbalyan-1234]

Proposal

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

Getting green dot even there is no contact method.

What is the root cause of that problem?

App/src/libs/UserUtils.ts

Lines 44 to 46 in 42e2247

	function hasLoginListInfo(loginList: Login): boolean {
	return !loginList.validatedDate;
	}

In this function we are checking for validatedDate although loginList is a list (array), so the property is not directly accessible which results to undefined and ultimately return true due to !

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

We can return this instead of loginList.validatedDate;

   return !Object.values(loginList).every((field) => field.validatedDate);

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

[mountiny]

@saranshbalyan-1234 reminder for any deploy blockers, always link the offending PR. Thanks

[marcaaron]

I currently cannot sign into staging to verify this. Probably related to the site instability. I will try again in a bit.

[marcaaron]

Though it looks like this is the PR where it was introduced:

https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/27778/files

[marcaaron]

cc @blazejkustra - but I'm guessing we did not intend to change the signature here and just got tripped up by the wrong type.

[mountiny]

Blazej wont get online for next probably 8-10 hours, can we proactively revert the PR if we confirm this fixes the blocker? @marcaaron thanks!

[marcaaron]

it's probably easier to just fix it. but you are the deployer so lmk how you want to proceed.

[marcaaron]

Oh I see you meant just for TESTING haha I have a branch here. ✈️ LAG

[marcaaron]

#28668

[marcaaron]

Yes it's that PR.

[aldo-expensify]

@mountiny @marcaaron I see that a revert was created, but not merged yet. I'm starting my day. Do you want to continue with the revert? I can also work on quick fix if we think it is better than reverting.

[aldo-expensify]

Left a PR here in case we want to fix instead of revert: #28686, feel free to ignore if you think it is safer to just revert

[mountiny]

If we got fix that is better, thank you everyone ❤️ going to review

[melvin-bot]

Upwork job price has been updated to $250

[melvin-bot]

📣 @situchan 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job
Please accept the offer and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[melvin-bot]

📣 @gadhiyamanan 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Reporter role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job

[mountiny]

@trjExpensify the payments here are $250 to @situchan for deploy blocker PR review and $50 to @gadhiyamanan for reporting

[trjExpensify]

Sounds good! 👍

[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 1.3.77-7 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• [CP Staging] Fix LoginList types #28686

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-10-12. 🎊

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:

• @situchan requires payment offer (Contributor)
• @gadhiyamanan requires payment offer (Reporter)

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:

• [@situchan] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@situchan] 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:
• [@situchan] 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:
• [@situchan] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@situchan] 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:

[marcaaron]

@situchan I think we are waiting for the checklist items to be completed here

[situchan]

• The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: [No QA][TS migration] Migrate 'UserUtils.js' lib to TypeScript #27778
• 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/27778/files#r1343470914
• 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
• Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• 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.

This bug should have been caught earlier during PR review if they fully tested their code changes.
Now that C+ is able to review TS migration PRs, there will be less chance of having this kind of regression.
As such, I don't propose regression test.

[trjExpensify]

Nice, thanks! Confirming payments as follows from here.

@situchan $250 for the DB PR review
@gadhiyamanan $50 for the bug report.

Settled up, and closing!