App [$500] LHN - Report is not marked as unread in LHN when the IOU is received

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

Version Number: 1.4.501 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): [email protected] Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team

Issue found when executing PR https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/35928

Action Performed:

Preconditions: Set up an OldDot admin account, invite the employee and approver to the policy https://sites.google.com/applausemail.com/applause-expensifyproject/wiki-guides/newdot-categories?authuser=0

Open https://staging.new.expensify.com/
Log in with the account of the employee added to the policy
Open https://staging.new.expensify.com/ in incognito mode
Log in to the policy approver account
Under the approver account, go to the WS room.
Under the employee account, create a manual request and send it to the WS room
Click on the "Submit" button in the created IOU

Expected Result:

When an IOU is received, the Report in the LHN should be marked as unread

Actual Result:

Report is not marked as unread in LHN when the IOU is received

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?

[x] Android: Native
[x] Android: mWeb Chrome
[ ] iOS: Native
[ ] iOS: mWeb Safari
[ ] MacOS: Chrome / Safari
[x] MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/78819774/df2c20c9-fb56-4b0a-a074-6c1185ac1654

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~013810a6929404cade
Upwork Job ID: 1769899997275127808
Last Price Increase: 2024-03-26

Mar 12 '24 21:03 lanitochka17

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

Mar 12 '24 21:03 melvin-bot[bot]

@MitchExpensify 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

Mar 12 '24 21:03 lanitochka17

@dylanexpensify you've been super close to message unread/read behavior - Should a new IOU show as unread? I think "yes", right?

Mar 14 '24 19:03 MitchExpensify

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~013810a6929404cade

Mar 19 '24 01:03 melvin-bot[bot]

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

Mar 19 '24 01:03 melvin-bot[bot]

Lets get this fixed

Mar 19 '24 01:03 MitchExpensify

Waiting for proposals

Mar 20 '24 01:03 MitchExpensify

Advertising for proposals here https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1711408083227239

Mar 25 '24 23:03 MitchExpensify

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

Mar 26 '24 16:03 melvin-bot[bot]

I think this is a regression from https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/36950, because of adding the !!report.lastActorAccountID condition here:

https://github.com/Expensify/App/blob/e542ba7c2d9e216c2cd401de0de8ed225fff4a7b/src/libs/SidebarUtils.ts#L270-L272

If that is correct, it might be better to revert the change. ReportUtils.isUnread should return the correct answer to the question "Is the report unread". According to the line above, it appears that ReportUtils.isUnread doesn't always return the correct answer. If ReportUtils.isUnread does not always return the correct answer then it should be changed. However, in this issue we see an example where ReportUtils.isUnread is returning the correct answer and adding the condition is incorrect.

If lastActorAccountID is needed to determine if a report is unread, then let's put that check inside ReportUtils.isUnread.

Mar 27 '24 23:03 kmbcook

I can take over this issue as a C+ reviewer because @situchan is OOO in April

Mar 30 '24 05:03 DylanDylann

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

Apr 01 '24 16:04 melvin-bot[bot]

@situchan is out OOO, reassigning a C+ via the auto-assigner for fairness.

Apr 01 '24 16:04 mallenexpensify

Looks like the same issue as https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/38778 based on @kmbcook finding.

Apr 02 '24 04:04 bernhardoj

Agree with @bernhardoj's comment and @kmbcook's analysis. This issue is older, but it probably makes sense to HOLD this in favour of https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/38778 as the C+ there has already selected a proposal/plan of action. Once the BE fix is applied there we can retest this issue. cc @MitchExpensify

Apr 02 '24 09:04 jjcoffee

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

Apr 02 '24 16:04 melvin-bot[bot]

Holding on https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/38778, thanks @jjcoffee

Apr 04 '24 00:04 MitchExpensify

Holding on https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/38778,

Apr 15 '24 22:04 MitchExpensify