[HOLD for payment 2024-01-28] [ECARD SETTINGS] Expiration date in card details is using the wrong format

[kevinksullivan]

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

---

Issue reported by: @kevinksullivan
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C05DWUDHVK7/p1705442308576449

Action Performed:

1. Set >$0 limit on card
2. Navigate to settings > wallet > virtual card > view details

Expected Result:

The expiration date should be in the format MM/YYYY

Actual Result:

The expiration date format is in MMYY

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01ff444ac3f126e525
• Upwork Job ID: 1747738873658785792
• Last Price Increase: 2024-01-17

[melvin-bot]

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

[ghost]

Proposal

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

[ECARD SETTINGS] Expiration date in card details is using the wrong format

What is the root cause of that problem?

The Expiration Date in

        expiration: 'Expiration date',
        expirationDate: 'MMYY',

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

We can just add a / and also will update the format to MM/YYYY symbol to make the expiration date as needed.

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

I don't there is any alternative approach.

[ghost]

Proposal Updated

[ghost]

So is my proposal not valid? @abekkala @grgia

[abekkala]

@kevinksullivan @grgia does this need the external label?

[grgia]

@abekkala not yet, I am triaging all the card bugs today/tomorrow first

[ghost]

so my proposal is invalid or of no use @grgia

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01ff444ac3f126e525

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor Plus for review of internal employee PR - @mananjadhav (Internal)

[grgia]

@AnshuAgarwal24 thank you for your proposal. I am taking this internally as there are a few issues on this page with style/formatting that I decided to group together.

For next time, it's helpful to look for issues labeled with Help Wanted as those are actively reviewing proposals. It is also helpful if you post where in the code base you plan on making these changes, as your proposal on this PR repeated the expected result section, but did not go into depth on how you would make those changes.

Thanks again, let me know if you have any questions or need help finding an issue to work on!

[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 1.4.28-0 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix card number previews and expiration date format on expensify card page #34677

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-01-28. 🎊

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

• @mananjadhav requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests

[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:

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

[mananjadhav]

@abekkala This is ready for payout. Can you please post a payout summary?

We don't have any offending PR for this one, and this was linked with two issues on design changes. I don't think we need regression steps for this one. @grgia wdyt?

[abekkala]

PAYMENT DUE:

• PR Review: @mananjadhav $500 (NewDot Manual Request)

[JmillsExpensify]

$500 payment approved for @mananjadhav based on summary above.

[abekkala]

@mananjadhav before I close this out can you confirm that you've requested payment in NewDot?

[mananjadhav]

@abekkala Yes I've requested and it is approved.

[mananjadhav]

@abekkala I think we can close this one out