[HOLD for payment 2024-12-17] Make Search Input on search results Page behave similarly to SearchRouter

[Kicu]

Followup after discussion in: #52568

Make the Input on SearchResults Page behave similarly to SearchRouter.
It should show:

• 5 recent searches same as Router
• chat rooms/reports working identically to router (navigating to chats when clicked)

Also make cmd+k on this Page focus the input instead of displaying Router.

CC @shawnborton @luacmartins

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @trjExpensify

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @trjExpensify (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.

[shawnborton]

Awesome, thanks!

[trjExpensify]

Nice, who's taking this one on @Kicu?

[Kicu]

myself ofcourse! 😁 please assign me 🙏

[luacmartins]

Done!

[melvin-bot]

@Kicu, @trjExpensify, @luacmartins Huh... This is 4 days overdue. Who can take care of this?

[Kicu]

PR will be ready today.
Recently a lot of people are touching Search simultaneously, and I had a lot of problems resolving conflicts on Friday.

[rojiphil]

Please also assign me to the issue here. Thanks.

[luacmartins]

PR merged

[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.

[luacmartins]

PR merged

[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 9.0.73-8 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Update SearchPageHeaderInput to display recent search and chats #53198

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-12-17. 🎊

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

• @rojiphil requires payment (Needs manual offer from BZ)
• @Kicu does not require payment (Contractor)

[melvin-bot]

@rojiphil @trjExpensify @rojiphil The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed. Please copy/paste the BugZero Checklist from here into a new comment on this GH and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[ikevin127]

This had a regression:

• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-19] Search - Search query "status:" is always "status:all" when the status type is changed #53823

which was confirmed by author in follow-up PR #53859 description.

[melvin-bot]

Payment Summary

Upwork Job

• ROLE: @rojiphil paid $(AMOUNT) via Upwork (LINK)
• Contributor: @Kicu is from an agency-contributor and not due payment

BugZero Checklist (@trjExpensify)

• I have verified the correct assignees and roles are listed above and updated the neccesary manual offers
• I have verified that there are no duplicate or incorrect contracts on Upwork for this job (https://www.upwork.com/ab/applicants//hired)
• I have paid out the Upwork contracts or cancelled the ones that are incorrect
• I have verified the payment summary above is correct

[trjExpensify]

Checklist time please, @rojiphil!

[rojiphil]

BugZero Checklist:

• [Contributor] Classify the bug:

Bug classification

Source of bug:

• 1a. Result of the original design (eg. a case wasn't considered)
• 1b. Mistake during implementation
• 1c. Backend bug
• 1z. Other:

Where bug was reported:

• 2a. Reported on production
• 2b. Reported on staging (deploy blocker)
• 2c. Reported on a PR
• 2z. Other:

Who reported the bug:

• 3a. Expensify user
• 3b. Expensify employee
• 3c. Contributor
• 3d. QA
• 3z. Other:

• [Contributor] 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: This was a continual work from this PR

• [Contributor] If the regression was CRITICAL (e.g. interrupts a core flow) A discussion in #expensify-open-source 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: Not Required

• [Contributor] If it was decided to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps using the template below to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.

Regression Test Proposal

Precondition:

Test:

1. Ensure that the central pane is displaying any page other than the search page
2. On key-in Cmd+k, verify that the search router is displayed
3. Enter a search text e.g. type:chat from:xyz@xyz.com and press enter to open the search page.
4. Verify that the search page shows the search input containing the search text.
5. On key-in Cmd+k verify that the focus is shown on the search input.
6. Key-in Cmd+k again and verify that the focus is lost on the search input.
7. Key-in Cmd+k again and bring back the focus on the search input.
8. Key-in a search text and press enter so that reports are also displayed in search results.
9. Click/Tap a report/workspace in the search result and verify that the central pane is navigated to the selected report/workspace.
10. Navigate back to the Search page and key-in the email of a user with whom there was no chat before.
11. Press Enter and verify that the user is navigated to the chat report of the new user.

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[rojiphil]

@luacmartins Can we keep the compensation here to $250 after considering the regression? The reasoning is that we did some awesome work here and it took more cycles of review than the usual ones to reach there.
cc @trjExpensify

[luacmartins]

Yea, I think that's fine

[trjExpensify]

Sounds good!

Payment summary as follows:

• $250 to @rojiphil for the C+ review

Offer sent!

[rojiphil]

Accepted offer. Thanks @trjExpensify

[trjExpensify]

Paid, closing!