[HOLD for payment 2023-09-07] [$1000] Web - Requested money - "Delete" button does not work when attempting to delete requested money after adding a PDF attachment to an IOU.

[izarutskaya]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Action Performed:

1. Click on the plus sign and select "Request Money". Enter the desired amount, email, and click "Request Money".
2. Click on the requested money to enter the reply threads. Add a PDF attachment and attempt to delete the requested money.
3. Observe that the "Delete" button is not functioning after adding the PDF attachment to the IOU.

Expected Result:

After adding a PDF attachment to an IOU, the requested money should be deletable as usual.

Actual Result:

Adding a PDF attachment to an IOU causes the "Delete" button to malfunction when attempting to delete requested money.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

• Android / native
• Android / Chrome
• iOS / native
• iOS / Safari
• MacOS / Chrome / Safari
• MacOS / Desktop

Version Number: v1.3.55-7

Reproducible in staging?: Y

Reproducible in production?: Y

If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail:

Email or phone of affected tester (no customers):

Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856

Notes/Photos/Videos: Any additional supporting documentation

screen-capture.-.2023-08-11T043711.755.mp4

20230821_201856.mp4

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:

Issue reported by: @tewodrosGirmaA

Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1691753680174959

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~011b0f4ca743a481a4
• Upwork Job ID: 1695129961561923584
• Last Price Increase: 2023-08-25
• Automatic offers:
• namhihi237 | Contributor | 26369431
• tewodrosGirmaA | Reporter | 26369433
• dukenv0307 | Contributor | 26388960

[DylanDylann]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

"Delete" button does not work when attempting to delete requested money after adding a PDF attachment to an IOU.

What is the root cause of that problem?

• Currently, according to this line

  App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

  Line 1070 in 03cf0b1

  const iouReportLastMessageText = ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(iouReport.reportID, updatedReportAction).lastMessageText;

  
  when the user sends a pdf file after requesting money, the ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(iouReport.reportID, updatedReportAction) will return {"lastMessageTranslationKey": "common.attachment"}. So the iouReportLastMessageText is undefined.

In

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

Line 1072 in 03cf0b1

iouReportLastMessageText.length === 0 && !ReportActionsUtils.isDeletedParentAction(lastVisibleAction) && (!transactionThreadID || shouldDeleteTransactionThread);

, accessing iouReportLastMessageText.length leads to error: "cannot read properties of undefined ...", so the remaining part are not run
Finally, we cannot delete request money

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

• We can update the

  App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

  Line 1070 in 03cf0b1

  const iouReportLastMessageText = ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(iouReport.reportID, updatedReportAction).lastMessageText;

  
  to

 const iouReportLastMessage = ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(iouReport.reportID, updatedReportAction);
    const iouReportLastMessageText = iouReportLastMessage.lastMessageText || iouReportLastMessage.lastMessageTranslationKey;

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

Result

Screencast.from.19-08-2023.14.08.39.webm

[namhihi237]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

What is the root cause of that problem?

We check should delete the IOU report here

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

Lines 1077 to 1079 in 4a7558c

	const iouReportLastMessageText = ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(iouReport.reportID, updatedReportAction).lastMessageText;
	const shouldDeleteIOUReport =
	iouReportLastMessageText.length === 0 && !ReportActionsUtils.isDeletedParentAction(lastVisibleAction) && (!transactionThreadID || shouldDeleteTransactionThread);

In the function getLastVisibleMessage we have a case if the last message is an attachment will return lastMessageTranslationKey

App/src/libs/ReportActionsUtils.js

Lines 393 to 397 in 03cf0b1

	if (isReportMessageAttachment(message)) {
	return {
	lastMessageTranslationKey: CONST.TRANSLATION_KEYS.ATTACHMENT,
	};
	}

So we missed checking the last message is an attachment

In addition, the error also appears here, In case we delete the request money but in the thread of this request money the last message is attachment, and the same error occurs.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

Lines 1052 to 1053 in 4a7558c

	const shouldDeleteTransactionThread = transactionThreadID ? ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(transactionThreadID).lastMessageText.length === 0 : false;
	const shouldShowDeletedRequestMessage = transactionThreadID && !shouldDeleteTransactionThread;

And here we haven't updated lastMessageText properly in optimisticData either:

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

Line 1161 in 4a7558c

lastMessageText: ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(iouReport.chatReportID, {[reportPreviewAction.reportActionID]: null}).lastMessageText,

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

We should add the conditions if the last message is an attachment:

1. We should update in here

  const lastMessageThead = ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(transactionThreadID);
  const iouThreadLastMessageText = lastMessageThead.lastMessageText || lastMessageThead.lastMessageTranslationKey;

  const shouldDeleteTransactionThread = transactionThreadID ? iouThreadLastMessageText.length === 0 : false;

2. And here

    const { lastMessageText = '', lastMessageTranslationKey = '' } = ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(iouReport.reportID, updatedReportAction);
    const iouReportLastMessageText = lastMessageText || lastMessageTranslationKey;

3. Update optimisticData

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

[c3024]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

Cannot delete IOUs which have attachment as last message in their thread

What is the root cause of that problem?

Here we are finding shouldDeleteTransactionThread by checking if length of lastVisibleMessage is zero

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

Line 1045 in 03cf0b1

const shouldDeleteTransactionThread = transactionThreadID ? ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(transactionThreadID).lastMessageText.length === 0 : false;

But if the last message is an attachment getLastVisibleMessage of ReportActionsUtils this here

App/src/libs/ReportActionsUtils.js

Lines 393 to 397 in 03cf0b1

	if (isReportMessageAttachment(message)) {
	return {
	lastMessageTranslationKey: CONST.TRANSLATION_KEYS.ATTACHMENT,
	};
	}

returns only an object containing lastMessageTranslationKey only, so the lastMessageText being non-existent in this object, it is undefined and finding its length throws console error.

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

We can replace the above line shouldDeleteTransactionThread with

const lastVisibleMessage = ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(transactionThreadID);
const shouldDeleteTransactionThread = transactionThreadID ? !lastVisibleMessage.lastMessageTranslationKey && !lastVisibleMessage.lastMessageText : false;

or simply

const shouldDeleteTransactionThread = transactionThreadID && !lastVisibleMessage.lastMessageTranslationKey && !lastVisibleMessage.lastMessageText;

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Result

deleteMoneyRequestWithAnAttachmentAsLastMessage.mov

[esh-g]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

Money request cannot be deleted when an attachment is sent after it in the transaction report. This occurs not only for PDFs, but for all attachments as well.

What is the root cause of that problem?

While deleting the IOU, we are checking if there are any other messages in the IOU report and if there are none, we delete the IOU report as well. This can be seen here:

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

Lines 836 to 839 in d53bbf0

	const lastVisibleAction = ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleAction(iouReport.reportID, updatedReportAction);
	const iouReportLastMessageText = ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(iouReport.reportID, updatedReportAction).lastMessageText;
	const shouldDeleteIOUReport =
	iouReportLastMessageText.length === 0 && !ReportActionsUtils.isDeletedParentAction(lastVisibleAction) && (!transactionThreadID || shouldDeleteTransactionThread);

But while getting the value of iouReportLastMessageText, we get undefined and then we try to access it's length which causes this error.

We are getting iouReportLastMessageText as undefined because the property .lastMessageText is undefined for output of the function ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage() which we are accessing on line 837.

Now, this property is undefined because there are actually two properties that the function getLastVisibleMessage() can return. It can either return lastMessageText (in case of normal text report action) or lastMessageTranslationKey (in case of an attachment report action).

So, in this case, since a pdf is an attachment, there is no lastMessageText property on the resultant object of the function but there is there is the property lastMessageTranslationKey which is set to common.attachment.

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

Instead of just checking that lastMessageText.length === 0 we should also check that lastMessageTranslationKey.length === 0 while setting their default values as empty strings so that there is no error when we access the .length property. An example of this can be seen in Report.js:

App/src/libs/actions/Report.js

Line 300 in 39ae317

const {lastMessageText = '', lastMessageTranslationKey = ''} = ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(reportID);

1. Therefore we should replace line 837 with:

const {lastMessageText = '', lastMessageTranslationKey = ''} = ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(iouReport.reportID, updatedReportAction);

2. Then also modify the condition for shouldDeleteIOUReport to the following:

const shouldDeleteIOUReport =
        (lastMessageTranslationKey.length === 0 && lastMessageText.length === 0) && !ReportActionsUtils.isDeletedParentAction(lastVisibleAction) && (!transactionThreadID || shouldDeleteTransactionThread);

3. Since iouReportLastMessageText has been renamed to just lastMessageText, we also need to change the following line:
   

   App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

   Line 854 in 39ae317

   updatedIOUReport.lastMessageText = iouReportLastMessageText;

   
   to have the renamed last message like this:

updatedIOUReport.lastMessageText = lastMessageText;

Additional Suggestion

This solution may also be applied to the logic checking shouldDeleteTransactionThread here:

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

Line 812 in 39ae317

const shouldDeleteTransactionThread = transactionThreadID ? ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage(transactionThreadID).lastMessageText.length === 0 : false;

Since here too, we are just accessing the lastMessageText and not lastMessageTranslationKey.

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

We can also refactor the function ReportActionsUtils.getLastVisibleMessage() to just return two fixed properties like lastMessageText: "Some Text" and isAttachment: false to avoid the confusion of managing two possibly undefined properties.

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Bug0 Triage Checklist (Main S/O)

• This "bug" occurs on a supported platform (ensure Platforms in OP are ✅)
• This bug is not a duplicate report (check E/App issues and #expensify-bugs)
  • If it is, comment with a link to the original report, close the issue and add any novel details to the original issue instead
• This bug is reproducible using the reproduction steps in the OP. S/O
  • If the reproduction steps are clear and you're unable to reproduce the bug, check with the reporter and QA first, then close the issue.
  • If the reproduction steps aren't clear and you determine the correct steps, please update the OP.
• This issue is filled out as thoroughly and clearly as possible
  • Pay special attention to the title, results, platforms where the bug occurs, and if the bug happens on staging/production.
• I have reviewed and subscribed to the linked Slack conversation to ensure Slack/Github stay in sync

[tewodrosGirmaA]

Hello@izarutskaya, could you kindly update my GitHub username? My username is not @Tewodros Girma, it is @tewodrosGirmaA

[dylanexpensify]

reviewing tomorrow! Got caught up with higher priorities today!

[dylanexpensify]

actioning today!

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~011b0f4ca743a481a4

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @dylanexpensify is eligible for the External assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

@burczu, @dylanexpensify Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[burczu]

not overdue - reviewing it now

[burczu]

I think we should go with the proposal from @namhihi237, because it fixes the issue, and additionally fixes the same problem in the thread.

However, the proposal from @DylanDylann also fixes the issue (but without fixing the same in threads) and was posted before @namhihi237's one (the @namhihi237 proposal actually contains @DylanDylann's proposal). So I think we could consider splitting the prize for this issue.

The proposal from @c3024 is pretty much the same as the one from @DylanDylann, and the proposal from @esh-g is actually the same as the one from @namhihi237.

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @flodnv, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.

[c3024]

@DylanDylann and @namhihi237 initially only dealt with messaging in the IOU report only. My solution dealt with messaging inside the thread of transaction only. @namhihi237 edited their proposal later to include the case of transaction thread.
So solution addressing the transaction thread is given first by me.
So, if bounty were to split, I may be considered as I was the first to propose to fix the bug in transaction thread. @burczu

[burczu]

Hmmm... it's hard to say who was first - it seems like the proposal from @c3024 and the update from @namhihi237 was at same time:

[c3024]

Their initial proposal did not contain the shouldDeleteTransactionThread. It was added in the edit. The time shown is of the initial comment.

[burczu]

@flodnv What do you think about it?

[flodnv]

Thank you for your proposal @dukenv0307. Indeed, after discussing it, @burczu and I agree that it is the most thoughtful approach, and might very well avoid similar bugs in the future. We will be assigning you to submit a PR.

@namhihi237 @DylanDylann @c3024 Even though when proposals aren't accepted, compensation is not issued and remains at the sole discretion of Expensify, we do appreciate your efforts here that ultimately led to the best solution. As such, we will be issuing a $100 payment to each of you to thank you for your time. Please note that this is a one-off recognition and does not set a precedent for such situations in future (or past) issues.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @dukenv0307 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job
Please accept the offer and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[c3024]

@dukenv0307 proposal appears to be a work around. Notwithstanding the backend reply or what is returned here in the getLastVisibleMessage function, attachment checking should be done with lastMessageTranslationKey only.

Anywhere we use getLastVisibleAction we need to check first for lastMessageTranslatioKey before lastMessageText

Also the backend returns a simple [Attachment] for th lastMessageText and the proposal is using the key and translating it to local language. So for Spanish, backend returning lastMessageText in English differs from the lastMessageText used here.
This would also cause inconsistencies.

I think implementing this solution can cause more inconsistencies.

Just adding a lastMessageText field to the returning object from the check of attachment in getLastVisibleMessage function instead of fixing the correct use of lastMessageTranslation key in IOU appears to be a bad idea.

[dukenv0307]

@c3024 Thanks for your comment. I just checked all the places where we use the getLastVisibleMessage function and I see that it is safe to return lastMessageText. Besides, we have another method to get the correct last message text so don't worry about localization

[c3024]

With this change I think there would be little (or no) purpose left for lastMessageTranslationKey then I guess.

[dukenv0307]

@c3024 Oh no, lastMessageTranslationKey is used for many purposes. You can search lastMessageTranslationKey in the code base and see how we just used it before

[dylanexpensify]

@DylanDylann @c3024 @namhihi237 please apply here for payout!

[c3024]

Applied. Thanks for the gesture @flodnv @dylanexpensify

[dukenv0307]

@burczu The PR is now ready for review: #26194

[melvin-bot]

🎯 ⚡️ Woah @burczu / @dukenv0307, great job pushing this forwards! ⚡️

The pull request got merged within 3 working days of assignment, so this job is eligible for a 50% #urgency bonus 🎉

• when @dukenv0307 got assigned: 2023-08-29 12:01:12 Z
• when the PR got merged: 2023-08-30 15:10:37 UTC

On to the next one 🚀

[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 1.3.60-3 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix/25589: Return lastMessageText and lastMessageText when last message is an attachment #26194

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-09-07. 🎊

After the hold period is over and BZ checklist items are completed, please complete any of the applicable payments for this issue, and check them off once done.

• External issue reporter
• Contributor that fixed the issue
• Contributor+ that helped on the issue and/or PR

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

• @burczu does not require payment (Contractor)
• @dukenv0307 requires payment offer (Contributor)
• @tewodrosGirmaA requires payment offer (Reporter)

As a reminder, here are the bonuses/penalties that should be applied for any External issue:

• Merged PR within 3 business days of assignment - 50% bonus
• Merged PR more than 9 business days after assignment - 50% penalty

[melvin-bot]

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:

• [@burczu] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@burczu] 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:
• [@burczu] A discussion in #expensify-bugs 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:
• [@burczu] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@burczu] If we decide to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.
• [@dylanexpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[burczu]

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:

• [@burczu] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: not found
• [@burczu] 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: not found
• [@burczu] A discussion in #expensify-bugs 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 found
• [@burczu] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@burczu] If we decide to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.
• [@dylanexpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[dylanexpensify]

paying out now!

[dylanexpensify]

@dukenv0307 @tewodrosGirmaA payments sent!
@DylanDylann @c3024 @namhihi237 offers sent!

[dylanexpensify]

done!