[HOLD for payment 2022-06-01] [$2000] Request a call is redirecting to the link - reported by @adeel0202

[mvtglobally]

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. Open Concierge chat
2. click on Request a call link in the message

Expected Result:

Request a call should redirect to a screen to request a call

Actual Result:

Request a call screen is redirecting to the link

Workaround:

unknown

Platform:

Where is this issue occurring?

• Web
• iOS
• Android
• Desktop App
• Mobile Web

Version Number: 1.1.40-0
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: Y
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers):
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Notes/Photos/Videos: Any additional supporting documentation

22-02-09-21-45-54.mp4

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @adeel0202
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1644425391389849

View all open jobs on GitHub

[MelvinBot]

Triggered auto assignment to @conorpendergrast (AutoAssignerTriage), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4749 for more details.

[MelvinBot]

@conorpendergrast Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

[conorpendergrast]

Reproduced; the expected effect is the same as clicking the phone icon ("Start a call") in the top-right

[MelvinBot]

Triggered auto assignment to @alex-mechler (Engineering), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4319 for more details.

[alex-mechler]

Ah interesting, nice catch. I think this can be handled externally.

[MelvinBot]

Triggered auto assignment to @mallenexpensify (External), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/8582 for more details.

[mallenexpensify]

Posted! https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~017f47eb7070f5ad02

[MelvinBot]

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

[MelvinBot]

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

[iwiznia]

I doubt it is this, but it's possible this was broken by #7662

[rushatgabhane]

@iwiznia hmm looks like we merged 7662 three days ago. And this issue was created days one week ago. So that shouldn't be possible

[iwiznia]

Yeah sorry, it is not that issue.
The problem is that it is a regular link in the text of message. The app is opening it as is, but we need to open it differently calling openOldDotLink so that it ensures the link opens logged in in oldDot.

[iwiznia]

Done! Thanks a lot!

[rushatgabhane]

can you please add details on the regression to the RCA sheet? Then, follow the steps in the C+ doc

@mallenexpensify all done, thanks for raising this!

• Here's the RCA doc
• Summary posted on #expensify-open-source - problem solution 1, problem solution 2
• Post mortem sent and the RCA sheet has been updated

---

To be honest I don't think we gonna have some case we are going to use expensify.com on chat out of attachments.

@mateusbra idk maybe we'll have expense reports embedded in chat. But the proposal seems fine for now.
I've added a few comments in the linked PR #8980

[mallenexpensify]

@rushatgabhane , @rushatgabhane or @iwiznia , is the 'clock ticking' on the 7 days without a regression to issue payment on this?
Also, @rushatgabhane is your compensation half because of the regression?

[rushatgabhane]

@mallenexpensify we aren't there yet.
Here's the PR incase you wanna track #8980

And yes, comp. is 1k for me

[mallenexpensify]

Thanks @rushatgabhane this is labeled weekly so I should get pinged and will then check the PR you linked for updates

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.1.66-1 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Open old dot link with openOldDotLink() #8980

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2022-06-01. 🎊

[mallenexpensify]

Can someone help me understand this a lil better?
May 9th - PR deployed to Staging - link
May 11th - @mateusbra posts sorry for regression.
May 13th - PR deployed to production - link

The first step in the regression process is

1. Make sure that the regression happens in production. If it does not happen in production, then the RCA process does not need to be followed.

Is this technically a regression if it was never deployed to production? And/or.. is there something I'm missing?
cc @rushatgabhane

[thienlnam]

Yes, the regression was found on staging and I released a CP PR that reverted it and therefore it never got to production

[mallenexpensify]

Interesting, for our Regression Cause Analysis (RCA) process (internal/C+) step 1 is

1. Make sure that the regression happens in production. If it does not happen in production, then the RCA process does not need to be followed.

Since this didn't hit production, according to the process/doc, @rushatgabhane shouldn't have his pay reduced. If we disagree with this setup we can discuss updating the process

[rushatgabhane]

@thienlnam please correct me if I'm wrong, the offending PR was in production for 3 days.

Here’s what makes me believe that - the revert PR and the offending PR were deployed to production in different versions.

• Offending PR deployed to production in v1.1.57-17 (gh)
• Revert PR deployed to production in v1.1.60-3 (gh)

More details in this short thread - https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1652890950040879?thread_ts=1652889554.746239&cid=C01GTK53T8Q

@mallenexpensify the regression was in production for 3 days (again, if I'm not wrong)

[mallenexpensify]

@rushatgabhane, for "Offending PR deployed to production in v1.1.57-17" I'm seeing May 13 as the date and @mateusbra commented on May 11th "sorry for regression", so I'm still confused.

[rushatgabhane]

commented on May 11th "sorry for regression", so I'm still confused.

@mallenexpensify ahhh I hope the timeline will add some clarity -

• 9 May, offending PR is live on staging (gh)
• 10 May, regression detected by Applause in staging only (gh)
• 11 May, "sorry for regression" comment
• 12 May, revert PR merged into main (development)
• 13 May, offending PR deployed to production
• 13 May, revert PR deployed to staging
• 16 May, revert PR deployed to production

Are you confused by the fact that we knew there was a regression on 10 May, but still deployed it to production on 13 May?

• Short answer is process failure. The revert PR wasn't CPed for stability reasons because of the upcoming earnings call (gh)

Please lemme know if this helped or just added to the confusion 😅

[thienlnam]

Oh yes that's correct - I didn't look at the dates and forgot about the hold we had on CPs

[mallenexpensify]

So... we had knowledge of the regression and an opportunity to NOT deploy it to production but decided against it? (cuz of the earnings call). If so, I don't think you should be penalized since it was Expensify's decision to deploy the PR to production.

@thienlnam , what do you think?

[thienlnam]

So... we had knowledge of the regression and an opportunity to NOT deploy it to production but decided against it?

This was my bad - I should have added the deploy blocker label to the issue. I created a PR the same day and assumed it would just be merged / CPed in with the rest of the staging changes but it didn't happen immediately which allowed it to get deployed to production.

If we're only docking regressions that make it to production then we caught this one and it should have been deployed before production and it was my bad for not adding the deploy blocker label on the issue and the C+ should not be penalized.

[melvin-bot]

@iwiznia, @mallenexpensify, @rushatgabhane, @mateusbra Huh... This is 4 days overdue. Who can take care of this?

[melvin-bot]

@iwiznia, @mallenexpensify, @rushatgabhane, @mateusbra Eep! 4 days overdue now. Issues have feelings too...

[iwiznia]

So is there anything left to be done here?

[mallenexpensify]

I think we can close.
@rushatgabhane shouldn't have his compensation cut in half for this one.

[mateusbra]

I think only the payment is pendent here

[mallenexpensify]

Thanks @mateusbra I got so caught up in the potential regression I wasn't tracking payment :|
Based on the production deploy link and @thienlnam 's comment, I issued payment. $2000 to @mateusbra for the fix, $2000 to @rushatgabhane for C+ and $250 to @adeel0202 for reporting. Thanks all!!

#8980 (comment)
#8980 (comment)