[HOLD for payment 2024-07-10] [HOLD for payment 2024-07-02] [$250] Expense - Expense preview in the main chat is blank when deleting expense offline

[m-natarajan]

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: 9.0.1-0
Reproducible in staging?: y
Reproducible in production?: n
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: Exp around https://expensify.testrail.io/index.php?/tests/view/4661677
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. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Go offline.
3. Go to FAB > Submit expense > Manual.
4. Enter amount > Select a participant with no unsettled expense > Submit the expense.
5. Go to transaction thread.
6. Click on 3-dot menu > Delete expense.
7. Delete the expense.

Expected Result:

The expense preview in the main chat will show 0.00 (production behavior).

Actual Result:

The expense preview in the main chat is blank.

In a different case where user submits two expenses and deletes both of the expenses offline, the expense preview in the main chat shows the total amount, instead of 0.00.

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

Bug6521642_1719072133966.20240622_235705.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01703c45cd54d93a3c
• Upwork Job ID: 1805181146577846482
• Last Price Increase: 2024-06-24

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @muttmuure

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @muttmuure (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[github-actions]

👋 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 @francoisl (DeployBlockerCash), see https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/9980/ for more details.

[m-natarajan]

@francoisl FYI I haven't added the External label as I wasn't 100% sure about this issue. Please take a look and add the label if you agree it's a bug and can be handled by external contributors

[m-natarajan]

We think that this bug might be related to #wave-collect - Release 1

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01703c45cd54d93a3c

[melvin-bot]

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

[francoisl]

This seems to be coming from #40168, reverting it locally fixes the issue. However I don't think we need to block on this, it just affects offline behavior and the expense still gets deleted when you come back online - going to demote for now.

[nkdengineer]

@francoisl I will fix this issue since it's my regression.

[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 9.0.1-19 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• [CP Staging] Fix regression when html doesn't exist #44365

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-07-02. 🎊

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

• @jayeshmangwani requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests

[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:

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

[jayeshmangwani]

@francoisl @muttmuure We can close this issue. The issue was a regression from the #40168 PR, and there is no payment due for this issue.

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.0.3-7 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• [CP Staging] Fix regression when html doesn't exist #44365

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-07-10. 🎊

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

• @jayeshmangwani requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests

[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:

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