[HOLD for payment 2024-11-20] [$250] mweb - Per diem - View your subscription link opens Subscription page then back to Workspace

[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: 9.0.59-0
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: N
If this was caught on HybridApp, is this reproducible on New Expensify Standalone?: Y
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: N/A
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): applausetester+zm27@applause.expensifail.com
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team

Action Performed:

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Create a new workspace
3. Go to More features
4. Enable Per diem
5. Tap Upgrade
6. On upgrade success screen, tap View your subscription

Expected Result:

App will open subscription page

Actual Result:

App opens subscription page and then opens workspace editor page quickly.
This issue only happens when upgrading workspace to Control from Per diem feature

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

• Android: Standalone
• Android: HybridApp
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Standalone
• iOS: HybridApp
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6657766_1730994753153.ScreenRecording_11-07-2024_23-47-45_1.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021854641998677095618
• Upwork Job ID: 1854641998677095618
• Last Price Increase: 2024-11-07
• Automatic offers:
• truph01 | Contributor | 104804112

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @sakluger

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

💬 A slack conversation has been started in #expensify-open-source

[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]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021854641998677095618

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @sakluger (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[carlosmiceli]

Wouldn't block deployment because it's a small issue that can be solved quickly.

[truph01]

Edited by proposal-police: This proposal was edited at 2024-11-08 03:00:25 UTC.

Proposal

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

App opens subscription page and then opens workspace editor page quickly.
This issue only happens when upgrading workspace to Control from Per diem feature

What is the root cause of that problem?

• Here we enable per diem, after enabling we are navigating the user to Workspace initial page:
  

  App/src/libs/actions/Policy/PerDiem.ts

  Lines 107 to 109 in daf0add

  	if (enabled && getIsNarrowLayout()) {
  	navigateWhenEnableFeature(policyID);
  	}

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

• We can pass a third parameter here disableRedirect = false:
  

  App/src/libs/actions/Policy/PerDiem.ts

  Line 54 in daf0add

  function enablePerDiem(policyID: string, enabled: boolean, customUnitID?: string) {

  
  and update:
  

  App/src/libs/actions/Policy/PerDiem.ts

  Line 107 in daf0add

  if (enabled && getIsNarrowLayout()) {

    if (enabled && getIsNarrowLayout()  && !disableRedirect) {
        navigateWhenEnableFeature(policyID);
    }

and then we can pass true here as third param in:

App/src/pages/workspace/upgrade/WorkspaceUpgradePage.tsx

Line 84 in daf0add

PerDiem.enablePerDiem(policyID, true, perDiemCustomUnit?.customUnitID);

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[ntdiary]

@truph01's proposal LGTM, just a few minor additions:
After we tap "View your subscription", navigation will emit blur event, and then call confirmUpgrade --> enablePerDiem.

App/src/pages/workspace/upgrade/WorkspaceUpgradePage.tsx

Lines 91 to 95 in bd880d1

	const unsubscribeListener = navigation.addListener('blur', () => {
	if (!isUpgraded || !canPerformUpgrade) {
	return;
	}
	confirmUpgrade();

Also, disableRedirect is a fourth parameter. 😂

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed

---

BTW, listening to the blur event seems a bit weird to me, but it’s not the main problem here. :)

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @carlosmiceli is eligible for the choreEngineerContributorManagement assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @truph01 🎉 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 📖

[truph01]

PR is ready

[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 9.0.60-3 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: View your subscription link opens Subscription page then back to workspace #52295

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-11-20. 🎊

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

• @ntdiary requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @truph01 requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)

[melvin-bot]

@ntdiary @sakluger @ntdiary The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed. Please copy/paste the BugZero Checklist from here into a new comment on this GH and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[sakluger]

@ntdiary payment is due tomorrow, please complete the BZ checklist by tomorrow. Thanks!

[ntdiary]

BugZero Checklist:

• [Contributor] Classify the bug:

Bug classification

Source of bug:

• 1a. Result of the original design (eg. a case wasn't considered)
• 1b. Mistake during implementation
• 1c. Backend bug
• 1z. Other:

Where bug was reported:

• 2a. Reported on production
• 2b. Reported on staging (deploy blocker)
• 2c. Reported on both staging and production
• 2d. Reported on a PR
• 2z. Other: Reported on staging but not a deploy blocker.

Who reported the bug:

• 3a. Expensify user
• 3b. Expensify employee
• 3c. Contributor
• 3d. QA
• 3z. Other:

• [Contributor] 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/51232/files#r1850266676

• [Contributor] If the regression was CRITICAL (e.g. interrupts a core flow) A discussion in #expensify-open-source 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

• [Contributor] If it was decided to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps using the template below to ensure the same bug will not reach production again. No need
  This is an edge case that was overlooked during feature development. I think it's sufficient to commen on the original PR. :)

Regression Test Proposal Template

• [BugZero Assignee] Create a GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon.

  Link to issue:

Regression Test Proposal

Precondition:

Test:

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[sakluger]

Thanks everyone!

Summarizing payment on this issue:

Contributor: @truph01 $250, paid via Upwork
Contributor+: @ntdiary $250, please request on Newdot

[JmillsExpensify]

$250 approved for @ntdiary