[HOLD for payment 2023-10-25] [$500] IOU-In distance request, after selecting start waypoint finish section disappears

[izarutskaya]

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

---

Version Number: 1.3.85-0

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

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:

Issue reported by: Applause-Internal Team and by @rakshitjain13 via Slack

Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1697268905255679

Action Performed:

1. Launch app
2. Tap fab
3. Tap request money --- Distance
4. Note "Start" and "Finish" section are displayed
5. Tap start and select a start waypoint

Expected Result:

In distance request, after selecting start waypoint finish section must not disappear.

Actual Result:

In distance request, after selecting start waypoint finish section disappears.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

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

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Bug6240021_1697517524922.fini_compress_1.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01e50d142f42c98aba
• Upwork Job ID: 1714227569034670080
• Last Price Increase: 2023-10-17
• Automatic offers:
• alitoshmatov | Contributor | 27245087

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01e50d142f42c98aba

[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

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @Santhosh-Sellavel (External)

[izarutskaya]

Not reproducible on production

20231017_100139.mp4

[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 @lakchote (Engineering), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4319 for more details.

[conorpendergrast]

I have reproduced this on Staging (not on Production) which makes this a deploy blocker 👍

[ayazalavi]

Proposal

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

Only start waypoint exists once we select start location in request money->distance

What is the root cause of that problem?

The root cause exists when we add a new waypoint. By default, there are 2 waypoints: waypoint0 = {} and waypoint1 = {}. Therefore, both the start and finish points are displayed. However, once we add a real waypoint, only waypoint0 exists, causing this bug.

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

Update this line of code

App/src/components/DistanceRequest/index.js

Line 76 in 91e2120

const waypoints = useMemo(() => optimisticWaypoints || lodashGet(transaction, 'comment.waypoints', {waypoint0: {}, waypoint1: {}}), [optimisticWaypoints, transaction]);

with

 const waypointsTransaction = useMemo(() => optimisticWaypoints || lodashGet(transaction, 'comment.waypoints', { waypoint0: {}, waypoint1: {} }), [optimisticWaypoints, transaction]);
    const waypoints = useMemo(() => _.keys(waypointsTransaction).length === 1 ?  { ...waypointsTransaction, waypoint1: {} } : waypointsTransaction, [waypointsTransaction]);

Result:

a4649225-50e8-48fa-8788-f7d661b6df65.mp4

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

[alitoshmatov]

Proposal

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

IOU-In distance request, after selecting start waypoint finish section disappears

What is the root cause of that problem?

This issue is happening because we are setting default waypoint values as null here:

App/src/libs/actions/Transaction.ts

Lines 35 to 36 in c226384

	waypoint0: null,
	waypoint1: null,

Initially onyx is storing this values without a problem. But when start waypoint is selected, we are updating onyx with new waypoint0:

App/src/libs/actions/Transaction.ts

Lines 65 to 67 in c226384

	waypoints: {
	[`waypoint${index}`]: waypoint,
	},

But after this update onyx is removing any keys with null value. Resulting in single waypoint. As stated here, any keys with null values are removed:
https://github.com/Expensify/react-native-onyx/blob/e7639af31b5f09629579ed906fecd3d779dc79ee/lib/Onyx.js#L1205-L1208

I think Onyx is accepting null values in waypoints because waypoints key itself does not exist in transaction{id}.comment object initially, and when setting it to {waypoint0: null, waypoint1: null} onyx just sets the whole waypoints object. But when we update it comment.waypoint key already exists with some values, and then onyx tries to merge objects in the process removing any key with null value

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

I think we should provide default empty values in waypoints as {}(empty object) rather than null value in here:

App/src/libs/actions/Transaction.ts

Lines 35 to 36 in c226384

	waypoint0: null,
	waypoint1: null,

Also here

App/src/components/DistanceRequest/index.js

Line 173 in 835ecf7

newWaypoints[`waypoint${index}`] = lodashIsEmpty(newWaypoint) ? null : newWaypoint;

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[conorpendergrast]

Noting that there was an earlier report of this via Slack, by @rakshitjain13, for the bug bounty.

[Pujan92]

Seems a regression from #26307 where null has been assigned in the createInitialWaypoints here, earlier it was {} cc: @kosmydel

App/src/components/DistanceRequest/index.js

Line 76 in 12d3669

const waypoints = useMemo(() => optimisticWaypoints || lodashGet(transaction, 'comment.waypoints', {waypoint0: {}, waypoint1: {}}), [optimisticWaypoints, transaction]);

Initially as optimisticWaypoints is null it will consider and assign an empty object based on 2nd condition. Once any waypoint updates the optimisticWaypoints gets updated and then the issue persists because null values prop will be removed in onyx.

[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 1.3.85-4 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix disappearing finish waypoint when start waypoint is selected #29811

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-10-24. 🎊

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:

• @rakshitjain13 requires payment offer (Bug Reporter)
• @alitoshmatov requires payment offer (Contributor)
• @Santhosh-Sellavel does not require payment (Eligible for Manual Requests)

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:

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

[neil-marcellini]

Bump @Santhosh-Sellavel please fill out the checklist

[alitoshmatov]

Looks like this one is ready for payment

[conorpendergrast]

Payouts due:

• Issue Reporter: $50 @rakshitjain13
• Contributor: $500 + 50% urgency bonus = $750 @alitoshmatov
• Contributor+: $500 + 50% urgency bonus = $750 @Santhosh-Sellavel (via Manual Request)

Eligible for 50% #urgency bonus? Yes

Upwork job is here.

[conorpendergrast]

Just waiting for the checklist by @Santhosh-Sellavel

[conorpendergrast]

Bump for the checklist please @Santhosh-Sellavel !

[alitoshmatov]

@conorpendergrast If I remember correctly @Santhosh-Sellavel said he wouldn't be online for couple of days in C+ channel. Could not verify it since I lost access to the channel

[Santhosh-Sellavel]

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:

• [@Santhosh-Sellavel] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: Add DraggableList component #26307
• [@Santhosh-Sellavel] 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/26307/files#r1375432954
• [@Santhosh-Sellavel] 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 should be caught will testing.
• [@Santhosh-Sellavel] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug. As it's also reported by applause we should have this covered internally tests
• [@Santhosh-Sellavel] 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. N/A
• [@conorpendergrast] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[conorpendergrast]

Sounds good, closing. Thanks all!

[JmillsExpensify]

$750 payment approved for @Santhosh-Sellavel based on this comment.