The API command "AddComment" doesn't include "isOldDotConciergeChat"

[kavimuru]

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

---

issue found when validating #37754
Version Number: 1.4.52-1
Reproducible in staging?: y
Reproducible in production?: y
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: n/a
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
Slack conversation:

Action Performed:

1. Create a new Gmail account in OD
2. Click on the Concierge chat button in OD
3. Resresh Concierge chat
4. Duplicate Concierge chat by opening it in a new tab
5. Send "MODERATION_TEST" to Concierge
6. Open Chrome console - Network
7. Search for "AddComment"
8. Open the API command
9. Look for "isOldDotConciergeChat" in the Payload tab

Expected Result:

The API command "AddComment" includes "isOldDotConciergeChat" with a "true" value.

Actual Result:

The API command "AddComment" doesn't include "isOldDotConciergeChat".

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

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6413565_1710445487289.1710423480788_bandicam_2024-03-14_14-33-25-784.mp4

Bug6413565_1710445487289.1710423480788_bandicam_2024-03-14_14-33-25-784.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

[melvin-bot]

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

[allgandalf]

Proposal

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

What is the root cause of that problem?

We have a condition to check if the deeplink is from OD reportIDDeeplinkedFromOldDot:

App/src/libs/actions/Report.ts

Lines 433 to 435 in 2faffcd

	if (reportIDDeeplinkedFromOldDot === reportID && report?.participantAccountIDs?.length === 1 && Number(report.participantAccountIDs?.[0]) === CONST.ACCOUNT_ID.CONCIERGE) {
	parameters.isOldDotConciergeChat = true;
	}

This will not be true if we copy the deeplink and open it in another window

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

Make a OR condition over ever to return true if the other part of the condition is true as we have a check if the chat is of concierge:

if (reportIDDeeplinkedFromOldDot === reportID || (report?.participantAccountIDs?.length === 1 && Number(report.participantAccountIDs?.[0]) === CONST.ACCOUNT_ID.CONCIERGE)) {

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

[melvin-bot]

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

[adelekennedy]

@trjExpensify I think this belongs under Wave 1 Collect

[trjExpensify]

#wave-collect you mean? Yup!

Looks like this was created as an issue when executing this PR from @rezkiy37. @cristipaval, @abdulrahuman5196 and @MitchExpensify might have some additional context as a former #wave9 project!

[cristipaval]

In step 4, by copy-pasting that URL in a new tab, a new App session is opened, and because it is not open with a redirect from the OldDot (like the initial tab), we don't consider it bound to OldDot. I'm not sure we want to fix this, given that this doesn't sound like common user behavior. Thoughts @sonialiap @trjExpensify ?

[trjExpensify]

I don't have a strong opinion. @MitchExpensify might, as he was spearheading this. Why was it included in the PR testing steps explicitly if it's not required for the implementation?

[MitchExpensify]

I am not seeing the first steps being taken here in the videos:

1. Create a new Gmail account in OD
2. Click on the Concierge chat button in OD

I raise this because any new account joining OD would be redirected to ND and as such I'm not sure why we'd even expect this:

"isOldDotConciergeChat" with a "true" value.

[adelekennedy]

aha! Then this feels like a non-bug to me?

[MitchExpensify]

I think so. The user is writing from NewDot so why would we expect the isOldDotConciergeChat" to have a "true" value? 🤷

[adelekennedy]

I thought there might be something going on with backwards compatibility (ya know - beyond my understanding ) closing this!