[HOLD for payment 2024-12-05] Review duplicates - Review duplicates button does not disappear after the expense is paid

[IuliiaHerets]

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: 9.0.51-1 Reproducible in staging?: Y Reproducible in production?: N Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): [email protected] Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team

Action Performed:

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Create a new workspace.
3. Submit an expense to the workspace chat.
4. Pay the expense.
5. Submit the same expense in Step 3 to the workspace chat.
6. Click on the expense preview.
7. Click Pay elsewhere and pay it.

Expected Result:

Review duplicates button will disappear after the expense is paid.

Actual Result:

Review duplicates button does not disappear after the expense is paid. It only disappears after the page is refreshed.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

• [x] Android: Standalone
• [x] Android: HybridApp
• [x] Android: mWeb Chrome
• [x] iOS: Standalone
• [x] iOS: HybridApp
• [x] iOS: mWeb Safari
• [x] MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• [x] MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5b298977-c9ec-41b7-ac00-0bea7b171ce9

View all open jobs on GitHub

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @adelekennedy

[melvin-bot[bot]]

Triggered auto assignment to @adelekennedy (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.

[melvin-bot[bot]]

Triggered auto assignment to @marcochavezf (DeployBlockerCash), see https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/9980/ for more details.

[melvin-bot[bot]]

💬 A slack conversation has been started in #expensify-open-source

[github-actions[bot]]

:wave: 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.

[IuliiaHerets]

We think that this bug might be related to #wave-control

[Shahidullah-Muffakir]

Related PR https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/50133

[daledah]

This is likely a BE Bug, as PayMoneyRequest doesn't remove transactionViolations in Onyx:

We can add optimistic data to remove transactionViolations from the FE side, but I think we should apply the same change to BE as well.

[adelekennedy]

this is high priority but imo shouldn't delay deploys etc - @marcochavezf if you disagree!

[marcochavezf]

Yup, sounds good, it shouldn't be a deploy blocker and I agree this should be fixed in the BE

[adelekennedy]

@marcochavezf con contributors help here at all or is this an entirely BE issue you're working on?

[marcochavezf]

I think this is entirely BE, I'm fixing another priority bug, I will come back to this one tomorrow

[melvin-bot[bot]]

@marcochavezf, @adelekennedy Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

[marcochavezf]

Continuing with investigation today

[marcochavezf]

I asked internally what would be the better solution in the BE

[marcochavezf]

PR in review for BE fix

[marcochavezf]

I quickly created a PR for the optimistic values. It's on hold for the BE fix.

[allgandalf]

Please assign me here for payment, I will be reviewing the attached PR https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/51770

[allgandalf]

PR approved ✅

[melvin-bot[bot]]

Reviewing label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".

[melvin-bot[bot]]

The solution for this issue has been :rocket: deployed to production :rocket: in version 9.0.67-9 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period :calendar:. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/51770

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-12-05. :confetti_ball:

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

• @allgandalf requires payment (Needs manual offer from BZ)

[melvin-bot[bot]]

@allgandalf @adelekennedy @allgandalf 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]

[melvin-bot[bot]]

Payment Summary

Upwork Job

• ROLE: @allgandalf paid $(250) via Upwork (LINK)

BugZero Checklist (@adelekennedy)

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

[allgandalf]

BugZero Checklist:

• [x] [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
• [x] 1c. Backend bug
• [ ] 1z. Other:

Where bug was reported:

• [ ] 2a. Reported on production (eg. bug slipped through the normal regression and PR testing process on staging)
• [x] 2b. Reported on staging (eg. found during regression or PR testing)
• [ ] 2d. Reported on a PR
• [ ] 2z. Other:

Who reported the bug:

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

• [x] [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: N/A (This was a BE bug, with optimistic data fix on the FE)

• [x] [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: N/A

• [x] [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.

• [ ] [BugZero Assignee] Create a GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon.

  Link to issue:

Regression Test Proposal

Precondition:

• The account should be on canUseDupeDetection

Test:

1. Create a new workspace.
2. Submit an expense to the workspace chat.
3. Pay the expense.
4. Submit the same expense in Step 3 to the workspace chat.
5. Click on the expense preview.
6. Click Pay elsewhere and pay it.

Verify the Review duplicates button disappears after the expense is paid.

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[adelekennedy]

@allgandalf what is your upwork profile so I can send you an offer?

[melvin-bot[bot]]

@marcochavezf, @adelekennedy, @allgandalf Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

[adelekennedy]

Just got your message on Slack @allgandalf paying out now

[adelekennedy]

payment made!