[HOLD for payment 2023-10-13] [$500] [Distance] - App does not refocus on address field on delete and cancel

[kbecciv]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Action Performed:

1. Open the app
2. Click plus and open request money
3. Click on distance
4. Click on Add stop
5. Open newly created stop
6. Click on 3 dots and click on delete waypoint
7. Click cancel in confirmation popup
8. Observe that address field is not focused

Expected Result:

App should focus back on address field on delete and cancel as we do for normal report messages

Actual Result:

App does not focus back on address field on delete and cancel

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

• Android / native
• Android / Chrome
• iOS / native
• iOS / Safari
• MacOS / Chrome / Safari
• MacOS / Desktop

Version Number: 1.3.67.2
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
Notes/Photos/Videos: Any additional supporting documentation

no.focus.back.on.delete.cancel.address.field.mp4

Recording.4396.mp4

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @dhanashree-sawant
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1694111463191149

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0115c7c503e332eb0f
• Upwork Job ID: 1701291764562169856
• Last Price Increase: 2023-09-11
• Automatic offers:
• Krishna2323 | Contributor | 26724773

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0115c7c503e332eb0f

[melvin-bot]

Bug0 Triage Checklist (Main S/O)

• This "bug" occurs on a supported platform (ensure Platforms in OP are ✅)
• This bug is not a duplicate report (check E/App issues and #expensify-bugs)
  • If it is, comment with a link to the original report, close the issue and add any novel details to the original issue instead
• This bug is reproducible using the reproduction steps in the OP. S/O
  • If the reproduction steps are clear and you're unable to reproduce the bug, check with the reporter and QA first, then close the issue.
  • If the reproduction steps aren't clear and you determine the correct steps, please update the OP.
• This issue is filled out as thoroughly and clearly as possible
  • Pay special attention to the title, results, platforms where the bug occurs, and if the bug happens on staging/production.
• I have reviewed and subscribed to the linked Slack conversation to ensure Slack/Github stay in sync

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

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

[Krishna2323]

Proposal

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

App does not refocus on address field on delete and cancel.

What is the root cause of that problem?

We are not refocusing on input when modal is closed.

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

We need to focus on the input using input ref when waypoint delete modal is closed by passing onModalHide prop to ConfirmModal.

onModalHide={() => {
    InteractionManager.runAfterInteractions(() => {
        if (!textInput.current) return;
        textInput.current.focus();
    });
}}

App/src/pages/iou/WaypointEditor.js

Lines 183 to 191 in 9d8518a

	<ConfirmModal
	title={translate('distance.deleteWaypoint')}
	isVisible={isDeleteStopModalOpen}
	onConfirm={deleteStopAndHideModal}
	onCancel={() => setIsDeleteStopModalOpen(false)}
	prompt={translate('distance.deleteWaypointConfirmation')}
	confirmText={translate('common.delete')}
	cancelText={translate('common.cancel')}
	danger

Result

[yh-0218]

Proposal

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

App does not refocus on address field on delete and cancel.

What is the root cause of that problem?

We are not focusing on input when modal is closed.

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

We can call this function when close modal.

    const onModalHide = useCallback(() => {
        setIsDeleteStopModalOpen(false)
        if (textInput === null || textInput.current === null) {
            return;
        }
        const timeout = _.delay(() => {
            textInput.current.focus();
        }, 500);
        return () => clearTimeout(timeout);
    }, [textInput]);

App/src/pages/iou/WaypointEditor.js

Lines 183 to 191 in 9d8518a

	<ConfirmModal
	title={translate('distance.deleteWaypoint')}
	isVisible={isDeleteStopModalOpen}
	onConfirm={deleteStopAndHideModal}
	onCancel={() => setIsDeleteStopModalOpen(false)}
	prompt={translate('distance.deleteWaypointConfirmation')}
	confirmText={translate('common.delete')}
	cancelText={translate('common.cancel')}
	danger

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[greg-schroeder]

Looks like we were double assigned @CortneyOfstad (because of this, which im gonna fix) - looks like you were assigned first, though, so I'm going to remove my assignment :)

[CortneyOfstad]

@mananjadhav Any thoughts on the proposals above? TIA!

[mananjadhav]

@Krishna2323's proposal looks like will work.

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed.

[melvin-bot]

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

[amyevans]

Hmm that didn't trigger the automation, I'm going to try again

[melvin-bot]

📣 @mananjadhav Please request via NewDot manual requests for the Reviewer role ($500)

[melvin-bot]

📣 @Krishna2323 🎉 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]

📣 @mananjadhav Please request via NewDot manual requests for the Reviewer role ($500)

[melvin-bot]

📣 @dhanashree-sawant 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Reporter role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job

[CortneyOfstad]

No worries! Thanks for the clarification @amyevans!

As for the payment, that has to be delayed based on the PR being reverted so going to adjust the title.

[Beamanator]

Seems the PR for this got reverted here: #28677

Should we add this focus issue to this focus issue tracker? #15992

Also it seems like this bug was created when testing the revert PR: #28921, I assume the revert didn't cause the bug, but maybe we can fix both focus bugs at the same time?

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.3.78-4 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Revert "fix: Refocus issue on address field on delete and cancel" #28677

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-10-13. 🎊

After the hold period is over and BZ checklist items are completed, please complete any of the applicable payments for this issue, and check them off once done.

• External issue reporter – @dhanashree-sawant paid $25 (50%) in Upwork
• Contributor that fixed the issue — @Krishna2323 paid $250 (50%) in Upwork
• Contributor+ that helped on the issue and/or PR — @mananjadhav to be paid $250 (50%) in NewDot
• Additional payment — @tienifr paid $50 in Upwork for helping to find that it was expected behavior, not a bug

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

• @mananjadhav does not require payment (Eligible for Manual Requests)
• @Krishna2323 requires payment offer (Contributor)
• @dhanashree-sawant requires payment

As a reminder, here are the bonuses/penalties that should be applied for any External issue:

• Merged PR within 3 business days of assignment - 50% bonus
• Merged PR more than 9 business days after assignment - 50% penalty

[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.
• [@CortneyOfstad] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[Beamanator]

Quick bump, can we fix #28921 as part of this one, or should it be separate?

[amyevans]

@Beamanator sorry, I totally missed your question the first time. The summary of this GH is that we've introduced no changes to the app and the GH will be closed as expected behavior. I see you've added them both to the tracking issue, thanks! I think that's the best course of action - we can come back to these GHs at a later date and approach more holistically, because honestly it's not efficient trying to address them each separately with a different group of individuals.

[CortneyOfstad]

After an internal discussion with the team, it was decided that this is expected behavior, so this GH will be closed.

However, due to the work by @mananjadhav and @Krishna2323 as C+ and contributor on working on the PR, it was decided to offer a 50% payment.

@dhanashree-sawant also offering you 50% for the reporting — this has been paid in Upwork 👍

@mananjadhav if you would like to request that in NewDot, I will get a payment summary posted below.

@Krishna2323 I've paid you via Upwork, so you are all set 👍

Once all payments are completed (just waiting on NewDot), we will close this 👍

[mananjadhav]

Thanks @CortneyOfstad, yes would need payment summary.

[tienifr]

@CortneyOfstad I was the one who spotted the expected behavior and raised here: #27182 (comment). Would love to get compensated for that as well.

[CortneyOfstad]

@amyevans Does that sound fair to you for compensating @tienifr as well? Just want a second pair of eyes — thanks!

[amyevans]

👍

[CortneyOfstad]

Alright @tienifr, after an internal discussion it was decided to offer $50 as a "bug reporter" for this issue in regards to expected behavior.

If possible, can you send over your Upwork profile so I can make sure that I am sending the proposal to the correct individual? Thanks!

[tienifr]

@CortneyOfstad Here you are https://www.upwork.com/freelancers/~01991fd5e5c11ef3ba

[CortneyOfstad]

Perfect! Just sent the proposal @tienifr 👍

[CortneyOfstad]

@tienifr you have been paid 👍

Payment Summary

External issue reporter – @dhanashree-sawant paid $25 (50%) in Upwork
Contributor that fixed the issue — @Krishna2323 paid $250 (50%) in Upwork
Contributor+ that helped on the issue and/or PR — @mananjadhav to be paid $250 (50%) in NewDot
Additional payment — @tienifr paid $50 in Upwork for helping to find that it was expected behavior, not a bug

[JmillsExpensify]

@250 payment approved for @mananjadhav based on summary above.