You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
[HOLD for payment 2023-09-08] [$1000] mWeb - Chat - Hide the keyboard on click of confirm button #25570
Reassigning another Bug team member: I realized that this one still needs to be reassigned and I'm OOO until Monday, August 28. 😞 I will take it back if it's still open by my return date.
Required action from the team: I ran out of time and have not tested this one. To avoid delaying the process, I've reassigned to test and confirm if there is a bug here. Thanks!
changed the title [-][$1000] mWeb - Chat - Hide the keyboard on click of confirm button[/-][+][HOLD for payment 2023-09-08] [$1000] mWeb - Chat - Hide the keyboard on click of confirm button[/+]on Sep 1, 2023
The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.3.61-3 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:
If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-09-08. 🎊
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
Contributor that fixed the issue
Contributor+ that helped on the issue and/or PR
For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:
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:
[@cubuspl42] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
[@cubuspl42] 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:
[@cubuspl42] 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:
[@cubuspl42] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
[@cubuspl42] 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.
[@alexpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:
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:
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:
No need for additional discussion
Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
No need for a new regression test
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.
@parasharrajat You're definitely right that it can also be seen that way. It's a tricky topic, as many Expensify bugs are related to some unexpected user experience, and there's no written down definitive source of truth how the app should behave. When something used to work in a more pleasant way and it changed, then it's easy - we have a regression! A bug. When it never worked the way we, at some point, decide is the right one; then either it was always broken, or it's just a new requirement.
But I don't think it really matters in this case... That issue is long past its regression period, so I don't think my comment did any harm... I was just doing the checklist ✓
You can leave the checklist empty if not applicable. It matters if we start adding wrong PRs into regression checklist. There are multiple purposes of this checklist.
It matters if we start adding wrong PRs into regression checklist.
The text of the bullet is "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", it doesn't mention anything about a regression explicitly. A regression is when something is working and stops. When a new feature is added with behavior that's later decided to be "wrong", it can be said that it was some kind of a mistake not to make it "right" from the beginning. As long as it's about learning, I can't see any negative consequences of my comment and you didn't mention any.
Maybe the text of the bullet is different than the intention behind it?
Can you please fix it?
As you don't have any direct authority over me, to the best of my knowledge, I will gladly change it when you convince me to.
*If applicable, the bonuses will be applied on the final payment
Extra Notes regarding payment: No bonus but everyone has been paid or payment has been prepared in Upwork. Please confirm receipt and I can close. Thanks!
Activity
alitoshmatov commentedon Aug 21, 2023
Proposal
Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.
mWeb - Chat - Hide the keyboard on click of confirm button
What is the root cause of that problem?
When button is pressed, text input is losing focus.
What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?
We can add
to keep focus in textinput like we are doing in other places.
We add above code to confirm button here:
App/src/components/PDFView/PDFPasswordForm.js
Lines 134 to 140 in 70000a4
What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)
melvin-bot commentedon Aug 24, 2023
Triggered auto assignment to @conorpendergrast (
Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details.melvin-bot commentedon Aug 24, 2023
Bug0 Triage Checklist (Main S/O)
Platformsin OP are ✅)alexpensify commentedon Aug 24, 2023
Reassigning another Bug team member: I realized that this one still needs to be reassigned and I'm OOO until Monday, August 28. 😞 I will take it back if it's still open by my return date.
Required action from the team: I ran out of time and have not tested this one. To avoid delaying the process, I've reassigned to test and confirm if there is a bug here. Thanks!
conorpendergrast commentedon Aug 24, 2023
Looking good!
25 remaining items
[-][$1000] mWeb - Chat - Hide the keyboard on click of confirm button[/-][+][HOLD for payment 2023-09-08] [$1000] mWeb - Chat - Hide the keyboard on click of confirm button[/+]melvin-bot commentedon Sep 1, 2023
Reviewinglabel has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".melvin-bot commentedon Sep 1, 2023
The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.3.61-3 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:
If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-09-08. 🎊
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.
For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:
As a reminder, here are the bonuses/penalties that should be applied for any External issue:
melvin-bot commentedon Sep 1, 2023
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:
jakub-trzebiatowski commentedon Sep 2, 2023
parasharrajat commentedon Sep 2, 2023
I disagree with the above comment. This GH is a feature request rather than a bug.
jakub-trzebiatowski commentedon Sep 2, 2023
@parasharrajat You're definitely right that it can also be seen that way. It's a tricky topic, as many Expensify bugs are related to some unexpected user experience, and there's no written down definitive source of truth how the app should behave. When something used to work in a more pleasant way and it changed, then it's easy - we have a regression! A bug. When it never worked the way we, at some point, decide is the right one; then either it was always broken, or it's just a new requirement.
But I don't think it really matters in this case... That issue is long past its regression period, so I don't think my comment did any harm... I was just doing the checklist ✓
parasharrajat commentedon Sep 3, 2023
You can leave the checklist empty if not applicable. It matters if we start adding wrong PRs into regression checklist. There are multiple purposes of this checklist.
Can you please fix it?
jakub-trzebiatowski commentedon Sep 3, 2023
@parasharrajat
The text of the bullet is "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", it doesn't mention anything about a regression explicitly. A regression is when something is working and stops. When a new feature is added with behavior that's later decided to be "wrong", it can be said that it was some kind of a mistake not to make it "right" from the beginning. As long as it's about learning, I can't see any negative consequences of my comment and you didn't mention any.
Maybe the text of the bullet is different than the intention behind it?
As you don't have any direct authority over me, to the best of my knowledge, I will gladly change it when you convince me to.
parasharrajat commentedon Sep 3, 2023
It was just a request. Sorry if that sounded rude. It was a little direct.
I already mentioned earlier that this is more of a feature request not a bug. So it does not lie under a mistake from old PR clause.
I don't want to continue discussing this so it's fine if you don't.
Anyway, Thanks for your time.
alexpensify commentedon Sep 8, 2023
Here is the payment summary:
Upwork Job: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0130b6dd1d51afa360
*If applicable, the bonuses will be applied on the final payment
Extra Notes regarding payment: No bonus but everyone has been paid or payment has been prepared in Upwork. Please confirm receipt and I can close. Thanks!
alexpensify commentedon Sep 11, 2023
Alright, everyone has been paid here. I'm going to close for now.