-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[C+ Checklist Needs Completion] [$250] Quick action - Split expense is created in a new group chat when splitting a second time from the same group from global creation #40745
Comments
Triggered auto assignment to @greg-schroeder ( |
Triggered auto assignment to @MonilBhavsar ( |
👋 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:
|
@MonilBhavsar 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. |
We think this bug might be related to #vip-split |
Is this working correctly on production? |
On prod, the split is added to the same group chat. On staging, it is added to a new group chat. |
Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~012731ac59083f0155 |
Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @DylanDylann ( |
@Gonals can you please have a look? Seems like we might not be saving the correct reportID to the NVP in this case |
This does seem like a server side issue to me |
I was wrong. QuickAction NVP seems correct, so client side issue |
ProposalPlease re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.The new split expense is created in a new group chat. What is the root cause of that problem?When we create split bill via QAB, we're calling Line 3597 in 944751f
What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?In the case we create a split bill via QAB that means the report already exists we should call
We should fix the same for What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)NA |
I noticed this bug, but it didn't have anything to do with the QAB (when I tested). It happened for non-QAB flows too 🤷 I'll test again in a bit |
Yep. This happens whenever you try to split again between the same group from global creation, QAB flow or not. Not a blocker |
📣 @DylanDylann 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Reviewer role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app! |
📣 @nkdengineer 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app! Offer link |
@DylanDylann The PR is here. |
|
The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.4.66-5 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue: If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-05-03. 🎊 For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:
|
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:
|
Payments made and job closed. @DylanDylann can you take care of the checklist? Thanks! |
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: [@DylanDylann] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: #39413 Regression Test Proposal
Do we agree 👍 or 👎 |
Looks good, but we might have a regression here #40961 (comment) |
@MonilBhavsar I tested and it still works for me on the latest main. |
@greg-schroeder @MonilBhavsar @DylanDylann @nkdengineer this issue was created 2 weeks ago. Are we close to approving a proposal? If not, what's blocking us from getting this issue assigned? Don't hesitate to create a thread in #expensify-open-source to align faster in real time. Thanks! |
1 similar comment
@greg-schroeder @MonilBhavsar @DylanDylann @nkdengineer this issue was created 2 weeks ago. Are we close to approving a proposal? If not, what's blocking us from getting this issue assigned? Don't hesitate to create a thread in #expensify-open-source to align faster in real time. Thanks! |
👍 We can close this after creating regression test |
Filing thing, thanks all! |
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: 1.4.64-0
Reproducible in staging?: y
Reproducible in production?: n
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: N/A
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: Applause internal team
Slack conversation:
Action Performed:
Expected Result:
The new split expense will be created in the same group chat (production behavior).
Actual Result:
The new split expense is created in a new group chat.
Workaround:
unknown
Platforms:
Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?
Screenshots/Videos
Add any screenshot/video evidence
Bug6457976_1713819353025.20240423_045119.mp4
View all open jobs on GitHub
Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: