[Upgrades] Enable features when a user Upgrades their workspace to access them

[garrettmknight]

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: All
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: N/A
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: @garrettmknight
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C036QM0SLJK/p1721318654213289?thread_ts=1721057410.589669&cid=C036QM0SLJK

Action Performed:

1. Create a workpace
2. Go to More Features
3. Click/tap on the slider for ‘Report fields’
4. Click ‘Upgrade’
5. Click ‘Got it, thanks’

Expected Result:

Report fields is enabled and in the LHN and the user is directed back to the ‘More features’ page

Actual Result:

User is redirected to Profile page and Report fields isn’t enabled.

Workaround:

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @garrettmknight

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @kadiealexander (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.

[garrettmknight]

Here are the routes that each feature we've just enabled upgrades should take after the user clicks 'Got it, thanks':

• Report fields: More features with Report fields enabled.
• NetSuite: Accounting with RHP for NetSuite setup showing /accounting/netsuite/token-input
• Sage Intacct: Accounting with RHP for Sage Intacct setup showing /accounting/sage-intacct/prerequisites
• GL codes is already good, but for posterity: The path that the user followed to access, either Categories or Tags, with the RHP open to the GL code editor /gl-code
• Payroll codes: Categories with the RHP open to the Payroll code editor /payroll-code
• Tax codes: Tax page with the RHP open to the Tax code /tax-code

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

[dominictb]

Proposal

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

• User is redirected to Profile page and Report fields isn’t enabled.

What is the root cause of that problem?

• Currently, we do not have a logic to enable feature after user click on upgrade button:
  

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

  Lines 33 to 35 in 7ba66a1

  	const upgradeToCorporate = () => {
  	Policy.upgradeToCorporate(policy.id, feature.id);
  	};

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

• In WorkspaceUpgradePage we should create:

    const onGotit = () => {
        if (feature.id === 'reportFields') {
            Policy.enablePolicyReportFields(policyID, true);
            return ROUTES.WORKSPACE_MORE_FEATURES.getRoute(policyID);
        }  
    };

• Then pass it to:
  

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

  Line 50 in 7ba66a1

  <UpgradeConfirmation

• In UpgradeConfirmation, update:
  

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

  Line 34 in 68c3b7f

  onButtonPress={() => Navigation.goBack(ROUTES.WORKSPACE_PROFILE.getRoute(policyID))}

  
  to:

            onButtonPress={() => {
                const routeToNavigate = onGotit?.();
                if (routeToNavigate) {
                    Navigation.navigate(routeToNavigate);
                    return;
                }
                Navigation.goBack(ROUTES.WORKSPACE_PROFILE.getRoute(policyID));
            }}

• With other features, we just need to add logic to enable it to this function:

    const onGotit = () => {
        if (feature.id === 'reportFields') {
            Policy.enablePolicyReportFields(policyID, true);
            return ROUTES.WORKSPACE_MORE_FEATURES.getRoute(policyID);
        }   
    };

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

NA

[allroundexperts]

@garrettmknight Can you clarify on what should be the behaviour if:
a. On the confirmation screen, if the user presses the back button instead of the got it button.
b. On the confirmation screen, If the user closes the RHP, by clicking outside of it.

[allroundexperts]

Draft PR is up btw. Just waiting on the above answers.

[garrettmknight]

I think they should both be treated the same.

[melvin-bot]

@garrettmknight, @allroundexperts Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @johncschuster (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.

[garrettmknight]

@johncschuster handing this one off while I'm OOO - should be an easy one, fix is already in PR.

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

[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 9.0.14-6 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: redirect to proper place after upgrade #45730

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-08-07. 🎊

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

• @allroundexperts requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests

[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:

• [@allroundexperts] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@allroundexperts] 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:
• [@allroundexperts] 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:
• [@allroundexperts] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@allroundexperts] 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.
• [@garrettmknight / @johncschuster] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[garrettmknight]

Thanks for the help @johncschuster - I'll take this one back over.

[garrettmknight]

Removing awaiting payment while we await that new PR to get merged and go out.

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

[garrettmknight]

Confirmed this is live and working.