[HOLD for payment 2024-03-20] [$500][MEDIUM] Categories: Parent that has own category is not ticked in All list when selected

[lanitochka17]

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: 1.4.44-0
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: N
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:

Precondition:

• User is an employee of Collect workspace
• The Collect workspace has these categories:
• Test
• Test: Test 1
• Test: Test 2

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Go to workspace chat
3. Click + > Request money > Manual
4. Enter amount and proceed to confirmation page
5. Click Show more
6. Click Category
7. Select the parent category "Test"
8. Click Category
9. Scroll down to find the parent category "Test"

Expected Result:

The parent category "Test" will be displayed with a tick in the list (production behavior) because it is selected

Actual Result:

The parent category "Test" is not displayed with a tick in the list

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

Bug6394349_1709055194859.20240227-135357_a31RC8Aq.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~010569839356f2354c
• Upwork Job ID: 1762533897677324288
• Last Price Increase: 2024-02-27
• Automatic offers:
• hoangzinh | Reviewer | 0
• dukenv0307 | Contributor | 0

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~010569839356f2354c

[melvin-bot]

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

[github-actions]

👋 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.

[melvin-bot]

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

[lanitochka17]

We think that this bug might be related to #wave6
CC @greg-schroeder

[hoangzinh]

I think it's not a DB, just an edge case displaying. User is still able to select another category

[blimpich]

Agreed, demoting. Will handle this with the regular bug process.

[melvin-bot]

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

[dukenv0307]

Proposal

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

What is the root cause of that problem?

• In here, parent category is always set as isSelected: false because the selectedOptions is not pass to getCategoryOptionTree

• Previously, we use OptionsSelector and we pass selectedOptions to it. Based on selectedOptions data, we know which option is selected and display it properly. But in PR, we use SelectionList instead

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

• In getCategoryOptionTree function, we can pass the selectedOptionsName and use it to check if the option is selected or not. It will become to:

+function getCategoryOptionTree(options: Record<string, Category> | Category[], isOneLine = false, selectedOptionsName): Option[] {
    const optionCollection = new Map<string, Option>();
           ...

            optionCollection.set(option.name, {
                ...
+              isSelected: !!option.isSelected || selectedOptionsName.includes(searchText),
            });

            return;
        }

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

• In the main solution, we also can replace:

 isSelected: !!option.isSelected || selectedOptionsName.includes(searchText),

by:

 isSelected: isChild ? !!option.isSelected : selectedOptionsName.includes(searchText),

[hoangzinh]

@blimpich I think it's a regression from #35567. I haven't found which line causes this issue yet, but when I revert this PR, this issue is no longer reproducible. Should we let the author fix or we open it for external contributors?

[dukenv0307]

@hoangzinh I mentioned the RCA in my proposal why PR #35567 caused the bug

[blimpich]

@hoangzinh it looks like there's another bug caused by the same PR that is going ahead with a fix, so for this case lets go forward with having this be open for external contributors.

I don't think that this should've had external immediately applied to it, but I'll ask internally if we had a process change in order to make sure of that. For now lets move forward with this as a normal issue 👍

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@dukenv0307 is there an ETA for a PR here?

[dukenv0307]

I am working on the PR

[dukenv0307]

@hoangzinh PR #37805 is ready to review

[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 1.4.51-3 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix selected parent category is not displayed as selected #37805

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-03-20. 🎊

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

• @hoangzinh requires payment automatic offer (Reviewer)
• @dukenv0307 requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)

[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:

• [@hoangzinh] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: 20354 category picker list refactor #35567
• [@hoangzinh] 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: https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/35567/files#r1534051972
• [@hoangzinh] 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: N/A
• [@hoangzinh] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@hoangzinh] 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.
• [@joekaufmanexpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon: N/A

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@hoangzinh could you please handle checklist so we can prep to issue payment?

[hoangzinh]

@joekaufmanexpensify @blimpich Because this is a DB, could you someone please check if we already have a regression test for it? Otherwise, I will propose a new one.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@hoangzinh the scope of this issue only impacts sub-categories, correct? If so, I think this is a pretty niche case, and a regression test for every run is probably not needed.

[hoangzinh]

the scope of this issue only impacts sub-categories, correct?

Yes it's correct. Do you mean this issue is an edge case and we don't need a regression test for it?

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Yep, that's correct. Could you please do the rest of the checklist? And then I'll issue payment.

[hoangzinh]

BugZero Checklist:

• The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: 20354 category picker list refactor #35567
• 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: https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/35567/files#r1534051972
• 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: N/A
• Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug: ❌ It's an edge case and we don't need a regression test for it.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

TY! All set to issue payment. We need to pay:

• @hoangzinh - $500 for C+ via Upwork.
• @dukenv0307 - $500 for PR via Upwork.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@hoangzinh $500 sent and contract ended!

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@dukenv0307 $500 sent and contract ended!

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Upwork job closed.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

All set, thanks everyone!