fix: distance - share with accountant

[paultsimura]

Details

This PR is intended to fix several issues with the tracked distance expenses shared with accountants.

Fixed Issues

$ #46897
PROPOSAL: #46897 (comment)

Tests

Same as QA

Offline tests

Same as QA

QA Steps

Violation flow

1. Create a workspace if needed
2. Enable distance rates in settings from more features
3. Add a custom rate
4. Edit the default rate to a different value
5. Open the chat with yourself
6. Track a Distance expense
7. In the Concierge prompt, click "Share it with my accountant"
8. Select a workspace
9. Verify there's an error on the rate field instructing you to choose a workspace rate
10. Verify you can't submit the expense with the error present
11. Select a workspace rate
12. Verify the error clears
13. Submit the expense
14. Verify it's moved to the workspace
15. Verify it uses with the proper rate and distance, and the receipt image is updated

Auto-select rate flow

1. Open the chat with yourself
2. Track a Distance expense
3. Check the mileage rate automatically set on the request
4. Create a workspace if needed
5. Enable distance rates in settings from more features
6. Add a custom rate with the exact same value as in the step 3
7. Go back to the chat with yourself
8. In the Concierge prompt, click "Share it with my accountant"
9. Select a workspace
10. Verify there is no error on the rate field
11. Click the "Rate" field
12. Verify the custom rate which you've added in step 6 is automatically marked as "Selected"
13. Submit the expense
14. Verify it's moved to the workspace
15. Verify it uses with the proper rate and distance, and the receipt image is updated

PR Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • MacOS: Desktop
• I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
• I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
  • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
  • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
  • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1733422995256259?thread_ts=1732731519.995199&cid=C01GTK53T8Q
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
  • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
• I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• If any new file was added I verified that:
  • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • A similar style doesn't already exist
  • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
• If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• If the PR modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label so the design team can review the changes.
• If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

2024-11-13.-.20.27.-.android.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

2024-11-13.-.20.27.-.chrome.mp4

iOS: Native

2024-11-13.-.20.20.-.Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.-.2024-11-13.at.19.54.36.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

2024-11-13.-.20.20.-.Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.-.2024-11-13.at.19.53.07.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

2024-11-13.-.16.08.-.Screen.Recording.2024-11-13.at.16.05.08.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

2024-11-13.-.17.01.-.Screen.Recording.2024-11-13.at.17.00.31.mp4

[paultsimura]

@neil-marcellini could we please request a copy for this action?
It's added as the first report action after I share my tracked expense with an accountant.

[neil-marcellini]

Don't we already have a message like this when moving a manual expense for example? Can we use the same copy?

[paultsimura]

@neil-marcellini no, the fallback is shown for those expenses as well:

[paultsimura]

Made some progress on the PR today.

[paultsimura]

With the recent changes, seems like the flow works fine (please see the recordings).
Still need the "Moved expense" copy though.

[melvin-bot]

@Pujan92 Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[paultsimura]

@Pujan92 I believe only the copy is pending here, therefore you can start testing the flow.

[neil-marcellini]

I asked for a copy check on the issue

[paultsimura]

@neil-marcellini since we went live with the P2P distance requests, will there be any cleanup for the canUseP2PDistanceRequests usages?

[paultsimura]

@neil-marcellini for the in-existing rate, would this format work (message TBD)?

---

When incorrect route is selected, we don't show the field error, but a form error at the bottom. I'm wondering if we should keep this behavior consistent (I just added the RBR for better clarity of which field is faulty):

[neil-marcellini]

@neil-marcellini since we went live with the P2P distance requests, will there be any cleanup for the canUseP2PDistanceRequests usages?

I already removed all of them on main, so please make sure that's removed here too.

[neil-marcellini]

@paultsimura I like what you did there with the RBR on the field and the form error message at the bottom. If you want, you could also do that for the route error, or tackled that in a separate PR.

[paultsimura]

Got a bit stuck on the PR – asked a couple of clarifying questions here.

[paultsimura]

@neil-marcellini @Pujan92 the PR is almost ready. However, I have an issue with the dependency cycle.

We've agreed on using the root level report name in the MODIFIEDEXPENSE message:
moved expense from self DM to chat with {username} or moved expense from self DM to {workspace name}.

I'd like to reuse the ReportUtils.getReportName function inside the ModifiedExpenseMessage.getForReportAction, but ReportUtils.getReportName uses ModifiedExpenseMessage.getForReportAction in one specific case:

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Lines 4015 to 4018 in c049ac7

	if (!isEmptyObject(parentReportAction) && ReportActionsUtils.isModifiedExpenseAction(parentReportAction)) {
	const modifiedMessage = ModifiedExpenseMessage.getForReportAction(report?.reportID, parentReportAction);
	return formatReportLastMessageText(modifiedMessage);
	}

What would be your suggestion to avoid this cycle?
It's nearly impossible to decouple the ReportUtils.getReportName as it uses a lot of the utilitary functions, such as isGroupChat, isPolicyExpenseChat, etc.

I could potentially move all of these functions into separate files and export them all from ReportUtils/index.ts, but it will create a dozen of one-file functions.

Or I could force allow the dependency cycle.

But maybe you could suggest a more elegant approach.

[neil-marcellini]

Looks great to me, thanks

[Pujan92]

Only issue I am seeing is that there is some distance unit(km and ml) inconsistency after the rate selection and with the price in the preview.

Screen.Recording.2024-12-10.at.23.23.06.mov

[paultsimura]

Only issue I am seeing is that there is some distance unit(km and ml) inconsistency after the rate selection and with the price in the preview.

Screen.Recording.2024-12-10.at.23.23.06.mov

I saw that too, but it should be out of scope here

[Pujan92]

LGTM, Thanks!

[paultsimura]

@neil-marcellini I had a conflict with recently merged #52221 which you reviewed as well.
Please let me know what you think about explicitly specifying the params subtypes that I've added in this PR (this change and a couple below) to avoid passing redundant data.
If it's a good practice, maybe it should be encouraged in other refactoring PRs as well.

[neil-marcellini]

Ah yes, that does seem like a good practice. Thanks.

[neil-marcellini]

@paultsimura can you please explain why the bug with the unit inconsistency should be out of scope? It seems like something we can and should fix as part of this flow.

[neil-marcellini]

Looks good except that one bug

[neil-marcellini]

Ah yes, that does seem like a good practice. Thanks.

[paultsimura]

@paultsimura can you please explain why the bug with the unit inconsistency should be out of scope? It seems like something we can and should fix as part of this flow.

Because it is something that already exists in prod (so not caused by my changes) and is not described in the initial issue steps and expectations. Also, the nature of the bug is different from the one we are resolving now, although it's also related to the "share expense" flow.

If we want to fix this as well, I would like to request bounty bump to $500 as it is a good chunk of extra work — we've already expanded the scope on this PR compared to the accepted proposal.

[neil-marcellini]

Thanks for clarifying that the bug is on prod and yes I agree that this has already been a lot of work 😅. Please report the bug, tag me, and let's work on it as a quick follow up.

[OSBotify]

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/neil-marcellini in version: 9.0.75-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	success ✅
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	success ✅

[izarutskaya]

@paultsimura QA team faund issue #53988 when validation this PR

https://platform.applause.com/services/links/v1/external/07fed6d6849dcbd2b4edb695dce1fc38808aad5a2d21e3ea58e4b987c6878c11

[paultsimura]

@paultsimura QA team found issue #53988 when validation this PR

Thanks @izarutskaya, we've already established that it's only been revealed by this PR, not caused by it.

[Julesssss]

Hey @paultsimura @Pujan92 @neil-marcellini. We have a blocker that might be related to these distance changes. Users are now unable to change distance rate because backend is not receiving the required customUnit.name data. Which seems possibly related to these changes.

If you could take a quick look that would be very helpful.

[paultsimura]

That issue indeed seems to be caused by this PR, although it looks BE to me. I replied in your GH, let's keep the conversation there for clarity.

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.0.75-6 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	failure ❌
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	success ✅