Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[HOLD for payment 2024-02-20] [$500] Task - The assignee ">" arrow is not grayed out when creating tasks offline #35196

Closed
4 of 6 tasks
lanitochka17 opened this issue Jan 25, 2024 · 28 comments
Assignees
Labels
Awaiting Payment Auto-added when associated PR is deployed to production Bug Something is broken. Auto assigns a BugZero manager. Daily KSv2 External Added to denote the issue can be worked on by a contributor

Comments

@lanitochka17
Copy link

lanitochka17 commented Jan 25, 2024

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


Version Number: 1.4.32-2
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
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team
Slack conversation:

Action Performed:

  1. Open a chat
  2. Navigate to offline mode
  3. Go to the assign task, enter the title, and complete the flow
  4. Click on the task and hover over the assignee

Expected Result:

The Assignee and arrow should be grayed out when creating tasks offline

Actual Result:

The assignee ">" arrow is not grayed out when creating tasks offline

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6355164_1706218851535.2024-01-26_01-22-50.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit
  • Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01c0e46b804f5e69b6
  • Upwork Job ID: 1750639313882955776
  • Last Price Increase: 2024-01-25
  • Automatic offers:
    • fedirjh | Reviewer | 28124121
    • neonbhai | Contributor | 28124123
@lanitochka17 lanitochka17 added External Added to denote the issue can be worked on by a contributor Daily KSv2 Bug Something is broken. Auto assigns a BugZero manager. labels Jan 25, 2024
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot changed the title Task - The assignee ">" arrow is not grayed out when creating tasks offline [$500] Task - The assignee ">" arrow is not grayed out when creating tasks offline Jan 25, 2024
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 25, 2024

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01c0e46b804f5e69b6

Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 25, 2024

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

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot added the Help Wanted Apply this label when an issue is open to proposals by contributors label Jan 25, 2024
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 25, 2024

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

@lanitochka17
Copy link
Author

We think that this bug might be related to #vip-vsp
CC @quinthar

@neonbhai
Copy link
Contributor

neonbhai commented Jan 25, 2024

Proposal

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

Task - The assignee ">" arrow is not grayed out when creating tasks offline

What is the root cause of that problem?

The assignee MenuItem here is not wrapped in OfflineWithFeedback

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


We should wrap the MenuItem here with the outer OfflineWithFeedback defined here:

<OfflineWithFeedback pendingAction={lodashGet(props, 'report.pendingFields.managerID')}>

<OfflineWithFeedback pendingAction={lodashGet(props, 'report.pendingFields.managerID')}>
   {props.report.managerID ? (
     <MenuItem
         ...
     /> 
   ) : (
     <MenuItemWithTopDescription
         ...
     /> 
</OfflineWithFeedback>

@fedirjh
Copy link
Contributor

fedirjh commented Jan 25, 2024

@neonbhai we have report.pendingFields.managerID , managerID is the assignee

@neonbhai
Copy link
Contributor

ah right, thanks!

@fedirjh
Copy link
Contributor

fedirjh commented Jan 25, 2024

Looks good, let's wrap both menu items with the same OfflineWithFeedback.

@Krishna2323

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@fedirjh
Copy link
Contributor

fedirjh commented Jan 25, 2024

@Krishna2323 It's repo with empty assignee.

Screenshot 2024-01-25 at 11 47 11 PM

@Krishna2323

This comment was marked as duplicate.

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor

@fedirjh, got it, I was creating with an assignee that's why.

@neonbhai
Copy link
Contributor

Proposal Updated

@fedirjh
Copy link
Contributor

fedirjh commented Jan 26, 2024

@neonbhai Proposal looks good to me.

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed

Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 26, 2024

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

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot removed the Help Wanted Apply this label when an issue is open to proposals by contributors label Jan 26, 2024
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 26, 2024

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

Offer link
Upwork job

Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 26, 2024

📣 @neonbhai 🎉 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 📖

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot added the Overdue label Jan 29, 2024
@fedirjh
Copy link
Contributor

fedirjh commented Jan 29, 2024

@neonbhai when can we expect PR?

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot removed the Overdue label Jan 29, 2024
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot added the Overdue label Jan 31, 2024
@fedirjh
Copy link
Contributor

fedirjh commented Jan 31, 2024

cc @neonbhai friendly bump.

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot removed the Overdue label Jan 31, 2024
@neonbhai
Copy link
Contributor

neonbhai commented Feb 5, 2024

Raising PR by EOD!

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot added the Overdue label Feb 7, 2024
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot added Reviewing Has a PR in review Weekly KSv2 and removed Overdue Daily KSv2 labels Feb 7, 2024
@neonbhai
Copy link
Contributor

neonbhai commented Feb 7, 2024

Sorry for the delay, PR ready for review!

Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 12, 2024

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot added Weekly KSv2 Awaiting Payment Auto-added when associated PR is deployed to production and removed Weekly KSv2 labels Feb 13, 2024
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot changed the title [$500] Task - The assignee ">" arrow is not grayed out when creating tasks offline [HOLD for payment 2024-02-20] [$500] Task - The assignee ">" arrow is not grayed out when creating tasks offline Feb 13, 2024
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot removed the Reviewing Has a PR in review label Feb 13, 2024
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 13, 2024

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

Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 13, 2024

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.4.40-5 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-02-20. 🎊

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

Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 13, 2024

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:

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

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot added Daily KSv2 Overdue and removed Weekly KSv2 labels Feb 20, 2024
@kevinksullivan
Copy link
Contributor

@fedirjh can you please complete the checklist above?

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot removed the Overdue label Feb 21, 2024
@kevinksullivan
Copy link
Contributor

Payments made, just waiting on checklist.

@fedirjh
Copy link
Contributor

fedirjh commented Feb 22, 2024

BugZero Checklist:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Awaiting Payment Auto-added when associated PR is deployed to production Bug Something is broken. Auto assigns a BugZero manager. Daily KSv2 External Added to denote the issue can be worked on by a contributor
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants