[$500] [HOLD for payment 2024-03-29] [HOLD for payment 2024-03-26] Category - Parent category is not checked above subcategories when there is <8 categories

[izarutskaya]

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

---

Version Number: 1.4.54-1
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: N
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Issue reported by: Applause-Internal team

Action Performed:

Precondition:

• User is an employee of Collect workspace.
• There are categories in Parent and Parent: Child format.
• There are more than 8 categories.

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com.
2. Go to workspace chat.
3. Start manual request flow.
4. In confirmation page, click Show more > Category.
5. Select Parent category.
6. Click Category.
7. Note that the parent category is checked at the top and also above subcategories.
8. As admin, disable categories so that there are less than 8 categories.

Expected Result:

The parent category will be checked at the top and also above the subcategorie swhen there are less than 8 categories.

Actual Result:

The parent category is only checked at the top and not checked above the subcategories when there are less than 8 categories.

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

Bug6418892_1710834339766.bandicam_2024-03-19_15-38-52-084.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~014cdd234c5c7999da
• Upwork Job ID: 1775543168628084736
• Last Price Increase: 2024-04-03

[melvin-bot]

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

[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 @lakchote (Engineering), see https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/9980/ for more details.

[izarutskaya]

@miljakljajic I haven't added the External label as I wasn't 100% sure about this issue. Please take a look and add the label if you agree it's a bug and can be handled by external contributors.

We think this issue might be related to the #vip-vsb.

[izarutskaya]

Production video

Recording.2267.mp4

[lakchote]

Offending PR found.

cc @gijoe0295 @c3024 @amyevans

[gijoe0295]

Checking.

[gijoe0295]

I don't think it's a regression because reverting my PR does not solve the issue. On production, it's not working properly already.

On production, when I select the parent category (Insurance), it will be completely hidden (note that Health, Life... are sub-categories of Insurance):

That made user confuse whether Health and Life are children of Advertising.

Since #38279 was a new behavior, the issue in OP is more of a case that we didn't cover yet. I'll raise follow-up PR right now.

cc @c3024

[lakchote]

On production, it's not working properly already.

Hmm, it it said Reproducible in production?: N so I thought your PR would be the the root cause given it concerned <8 categories.

Thanks for the fast TA and raising a follow-up PR, it's appreciated.

[miljakljajic]

Just getting to this now after some calls - reviewing

[gijoe0295]

@miljakljajic I'm working on follow-up PR. Will be ready in 1 hour.

[miljakljajic]

Fantastic, thank you

[gijoe0295]

@miljakljajic @lakchote PR is ready but I'm not sure who is the correct C+ to be assigned here. Please handle that for me. Thanks!

[hungvu193]

I'm assigned to this one, I can review it if @c3024 is not available

[c3024]

I'm available.

[lakchote]

@miljakljajic @lakchote PR is ready but I'm not sure who is the correct C+ to be assigned here. Please handle that for me. Thanks!

Good question, I'd say it's @c3024 that should be the reviewer since he had the context of the issue beforehand and knew a follow-up PR for this problem was going to be raised. @miljakljajic please feel free to say otherwise if you feel that shouldn't be the case.

[AndrewGable]

Bug looks resolved from my testing, however, I do want to leave this open for @miljakljajic to confirm everything is working with tags correctly.

[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 1.4.54-4 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix: Parent category not show selected state in category tree #38592

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-03-26. 🎊

[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:

• [@lakchote] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: on production, it wasn't working properly already. Wasn't a regression but more an use case we didn't cover yet.
• [@lakchote] 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: NA
• [@lakchote] 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: NA
• [@lakchote] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug. Test already done by QA.
• [@lakchote] 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. NA
• [@miljakljajic] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.4.55-3 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix: Parent category not show selected state in category tree #38592

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-03-29. 🎊

[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:

• [@lakchote] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: on production, it wasn't working properly already. Wasn't a regression but more an use case we didn't cover yet.
• [@lakchote] 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: NA
• [@lakchote] 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: NA
• [@lakchote] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug. Test already done by QA.
• [@lakchote] 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. NA
• [@miljakljajic] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[miljakljajic]

Testing now and will issue payment

[miljakljajic]

Apologies I never updated this GH - working as expected now:

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~014cdd234c5c7999da

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @c3024 is eligible for the External assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[gijoe0295]

@miljakljajic This is a follow-up of #37774 so I don't think we need more payment here.

[miljakljajic]

Thank you @gijoe0295 ! @lakchote @AndrewGable just to be sure, is there no payment for @c3024 here? I thought we issued payment when a PR was reviewed regardless of whether it was caused by a regression?

[lakchote]

Thank you @gijoe0295 ! @lakchote @AndrewGable just to be sure, is there no payment for @c3024 here? I thought we issued payment when a PR was reviewed regardless of whether it was caused by a regression?

After asking for confirmation, we should not issue payment for this PR review.

This should have been identified and handled in the first PR with more thorough testing.

cc @miljakljajic

[miljakljajic]

Noted, thank you Lucian! In that case, I think we can close.