[HOLD for payment 2023-11-30] [$500] Web - Different markdown when copied after sending.

[kbecciv]

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. Go to any report
2. Paste and send markdown provided below
3. Copy the message sent
4. Paste the copied message in composer
5. Observe the difference

Markdown :

code

text

code

Expected Result:

The copied markdown should be the same as the markdown sent.

Actual Result:

The copied markdown is different from the markdown sent. Specifically, the closing of second code block appears after the text not beneath it:

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: 1.3.61.0
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

Monosnap.screencast.2023-08-26.21-36-47.mp4

Recording.4159.mp4

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @Krishna2323
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1693066653312359

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0165c30b36785b9c56
• Upwork Job ID: 1711445892210065408
• Last Price Increase: 2023-11-13
• Automatic offers:
• 0xmiroslav | Reviewer | 27695522
• eh2077 | Contributor | 27695523
• krishna2323 | Reporter | 27695525
• nikosamofa | Contributor | 27714814

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @trjExpensify (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

[Krishna2323]

@kbecciv, can you pls update the issue reporter mention to my id. Thanks

[trjExpensify]

I can reproduce this. It produces the same results on enter:

but yes, the closing of the second code block appears after the text and not beneath it:

I think given that it renders correctly in the chat, it should be classified under this issue and approached in unison with other small markdown fixes. CC: @Beamanator

[Beamanator]

That sounds totally fair to me @trjExpensify 👍

[trjExpensify]

Done!

[kbecciv]

@Krishna2323 Updated

[trjExpensify]

Same, @Beamanator is collecting more of these for his master before tackling them together.

[trjExpensify]

Alrighty, after a discussion in the linked issue.. we're going to take this off hold. Open for proposals!

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0165c30b36785b9c56

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @0xmiroslav (External)

[trjExpensify]

I see a expensify-common PR linked, adding the reviewing label.

[nikos-amofa]

@trjExpensify @srikarparsi cc @danieldoglas
The PR Expensify/expensify-common#606 is merged. What other steps do I need to take to mark this issue as done? Thanks

[0xmiros]

@nikosamofa please create app PR which bumps package version

[srikarparsi]

I think once the regression period is over, this issue should be good for payment. Is there anything I'm missing @0xmiroslav @trjExpensify?

[0xmiros]

yes, correct @srikarparsi. Thanks

[nikos-amofa]

Thank you @0xmiroslav @srikarparsi @trjExpensify

[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 1.4.2-3 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• bump expensify-common version to latest #31644

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-11-30. 🎊

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:

• @nikosamofa requires payment offer (Contributor)
• @0xmiroslav requires payment offer (Reviewer)
• @Krishna2323 requires payment offer (Reporter)

[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:

• [@0xmiroslav] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@0xmiroslav] 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:
• [@0xmiroslav] 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:
• [@0xmiroslav] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@0xmiroslav] 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.
• [@trjExpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[nikos-amofa]

@srikarparsi @trjExpensify @0xmiroslav
The regression period is over for this one

[trjExpensify]

Yep! Can we get the checklist complete please, then we can start initiate payments. :)

Confirming those payments when ready will be:

1. @nikosamofa $500 for the fix
2. @0xmiroslav $500 for the C+ review
3. @Krishna2323 $50 for the bug report

[nikos-amofa]

@trjExpensify , well, the PR was merged after 2 business days (4 days due to weekend)
The upwork job says that if it's merged within 3 business days, it's eligible for 50% bonus 😀

[0xmiros]

BZ Checklist:
No regression. The bug existed from the beginning, issue closed/reopened several times.
Regression test is already added as automated test cases in expensify-common repo.

[trjExpensify]

@trjExpensify , well, the PR was merged after 2 business days (4 days due to weekend)
The upwork job says that if it's merged within 3 business days, it's eligible for 50% bonus 😀

The PR was created after Oct 24th, which was the last day of the urgency bonuses as per this announcement.

@0xmiroslav sounds good!

[trjExpensify]

@Krishna2323 - paid
@nikosamofa - paid
@0xmiroslav - over to you to track your payment for this one.

Closing!