[HOLD for payment 2024-03-13] [$500] Split - "Enter a merchant name" error message appears while scanning is in process

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

Version Number: 1.4.29-0
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: Y
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: https://expensify.testrail.io/index.php?/tests/view/4211017
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers):
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team
Slack conversation:

Action Performed:

Pre-requisite: user must have created a workspace and invited a member as employee

As the employee, go to the Workspace chat
Tap on the "+" button and select "Split bill"
On "Scan" option, upload any image and create the Split
On the Workspace chat, tap on the split preview while it is still scanning
Scroll down to "Merchant" field

Expected Result:

Error message for missing merchant should not appear while the scanning is in process

Actual Result:

Error message for missing merchant appears while scanning is in process

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6350890_1705948714600.Xfyp7681_1_.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01e28b0f9e8a41bb6e
Upwork Job ID: 1749515793504890880
Last Price Increase: 2024-02-14
Automatic offers:

situchan | Contributor | 28146340
bernhardoj | Contributor | 0

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01e28b0f9e8a41bb6e

We think that this bug might be related to #vip-split-p2p-chat-groups

Proposal

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

Error message for missing merchant appears while scanning is in process

What is the root cause of that problem?

We always display the error if merchant is missed without checking the scan is scanning or not

App/src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList.js

Line 715 in 616d75f

    
           error={shouldDisplayMerchantError || (shouldDisplayFieldError && TransactionUtils.isMerchantMissing(transaction)) ? translate('common.error.enterMerchant') : ''}

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

We should pass isScaning from SplitbillDetailPage into MoneyRequestConfirmationList and use it to not display any error if the request is scaning

App/src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList.js

Line 715 in 616d75f

    
           error={shouldDisplayMerchantError || (shouldDisplayFieldError && TransactionUtils.isMerchantMissing(transaction)) ? translate('common.error.enterMerchant') : ''}

Or we can wait for MoneyRequestConfirmationList to be removed and then handle it in MoneyTemporaryForRefactorRequestConfirmationList

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

NA

I'm actually unable to reproduce.
Is it specific to some receipts?

Proposal

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

The merchant field shows an error on a split bill details page while the receipt is still scanning.

What is the root cause of that problem?

Currently, we show the error if shouldDisplayMerchantError or shouldDisplayFieldError is true.

App/src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList.js

Line 715 in 9c552ab

    
           error={shouldDisplayMerchantError || (shouldDisplayFieldError && TransactionUtils.isMerchantMissing(transaction)) ? translate('common.error.enterMerchant') : ''}

shouldDisplayFieldError will be false when the receipt is still scanning.

App/src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList.js

Lines 276 to 281 in 9c552ab

    
           const shouldDisplayFieldError = useMemo(() => { 
        
               if (!props.isEditingSplitBill) { 
        
                   return false; 
        
               } 
        
               return (props.hasSmartScanFailed && TransactionUtils.hasMissingSmartscanFields(transaction)) || (didConfirmSplit && TransactionUtils.areRequiredFieldsEmpty(transaction));

But shouldDisplayMerchantError is always true because isScanRequest is always false.

App/src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList.js

Line 285 in 9c552ab

    
           const shouldDisplayMerchantError = props.isPolicyExpenseChat && !props.isScanRequest && isMerchantEmpty;

The shouldDisplayMerchantError was added in #32486. The condition was added in both MoneyRequestConfirmationList and MoneyTemporaryForRefactorRequestConfirmationList (with a different name). I'm pretty sure they just copied it from MoneyTemporaryForRefactorRequestConfirmationList to MoneyRequetConfirmationList without testing the existence of isScanRequest (it's not available on both pages).

The isScanRequest is added in #29473 where it was added for the money request create page only, and not for the split bill details page intentionally.

The reason for the condition is to not show a merchant field if we are going to create a new scan request (just like other field, such as amount), but this condition is not applicable for the split bill details page (which still uses MoneyRequestConfirmationList). On MoneyRequestConfirmationList, we use this condition to decide whether to show an error or not which is not correct.

If we look at MoneyRequestView, we can see the condition to decide whether to show the merchant error or not.

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestView.js

Line 225 in 9c552ab

hasErrors = canEdit && TransactionUtils.hasMissingSmartscanFields(transaction);

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestView.js

Line 317 in 9c552ab

    
           error={hasErrors && isPolicyExpenseChat && isEmptyMerchant ? translate('common.error.enterMerchant') : ''}

And that's the one that we should follow.

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

We can update shouldDisplayMerchantError to:

const shouldDisplayMerchantError = props.isPolicyExpenseChat && shouldDisplayFieldError && isMerchantEmpty;

Then we can remove the shouldDisplayFieldError here

App/src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList.js

Line 715 in 9c552ab

    
           error={shouldDisplayMerchantError || (shouldDisplayFieldError && TransactionUtils.isMerchantMissing(transaction)) ? translate('common.error.enterMerchant') : ''}

If we later migrate to MoneyTemporaryForRefactorRequestConfirmationList, then we need to pass isEditingSplitBill as false from IOURequestStepConfirmation

Proposal

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

Split - "Enter a merchant name" error message appears while scanning is in process

What is the root cause of that problem?

This happens as this condition evaluates to true:

App/src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList.js

Line 715 in b68abb4

    
           error={shouldDisplayMerchantError || (shouldDisplayFieldError && TransactionUtils.isMerchantMissing(transaction)) ? translate('common.error.enterMerchant') : ''}

shouldDisplayFieldErrors would evaluate to be true if there is any missing field in the request.

The problem is we OR the result of shouldDisplayMerchantError, which does not use the variable correctly.

We use shouldDisplayMerchantError to check if the report requires merchant and if an error should be shown

We use this to only show merchant errors, in places where it is a required field.

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

 The || condition here should be an && condition:
 

App/src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList.js

Line 715 in b68abb4

    
           error={shouldDisplayMerchantError || (shouldDisplayFieldError && TransactionUtils.isMerchantMissing(transaction)) ? translate('common.error.enterMerchant') : ''}

error={shouldDisplayMerchantError && shouldDisplayFieldError && TransactionUtils.isMerchantMissing(transaction) ? translate('common.error.enterMerchant') : ''}

We should also add shouldDisplayMerchantError check for brickRoadIndicator prop condition here:

App/src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList.js

Line 714 in b68abb4

    
           brickRoadIndicator={shouldDisplayFieldError && TransactionUtils.isMerchantMissing(transaction) ? CONST.BRICK_ROAD_INDICATOR_STATUS.ERROR : ''}

brickRoadIndicator={shouldDisplayMerchantError && shouldDisplayFieldError && TransactionUtils.isMerchantMissing(transaction) ? CONST.BRICK_ROAD_INDICATOR_STATUS.ERROR : ''}

Result:

Before

Screen.Recording.2024-01-23.at.1.51.04.AM.mov

After

Screen.Recording.2024-01-23.at.1.46.30.AM.mov

Alternatively

For a finer change, since merchant is not a required field for Split Request, while showing error, we should check for !isSplitBill condition:

error={shouldDisplayMerchantError || (shouldDisplayFieldError && !isSplitBill 
&& TransactionUtils.isMerchantMissing(transaction)) ? translate('common.error.enterMerchant') : ''}

@lanitochka17

@lanitochka17 hi, looks like we don't have a C+ assigned here 🤔

Even BZ member not assigned here 🤔

I can take this as C+

6 days overdue. This is scarier than being forced to listen to Vogon poetry!

8 days overdue is a lot. Should this be a Weekly issue? If so, feel free to change it!

@situchan

Cool, in that case do you want to check off the boxes @situchan or is there something pending before payment?

@situchan

@situchan, do you think you can complete the checklist whenever you get a chance?

@anmurali

@anmurali, @srikarparsi, @bernhardoj, @situchan Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

@situchan

@situchan - bump on the checklist.

@anmurali

@anmurali, @srikarparsi, @bernhardoj, @situchan Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

@anmurali

@anmurali, @srikarparsi, @bernhardoj, @situchan 6 days overdue. This is scarier than being forced to listen to Vogon poetry!

Since the regression test exists here, and everyone's been paid, I will close this issue

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

[HOLD for payment 2024-03-13] [$500] Split - "Enter a merchant name" error message appears while scanning is in process #34916

Action Performed:

Expected Result:

Actual Result:

Workaround:

Platforms:

Screenshots/Videos

Proposal

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

What is the root cause of that problem?

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

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Proposal

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

What is the root cause of that problem?

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

Proposal

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

What is the root cause of that problem?

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

Result:

Alternatively

86 remaining items

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

	const shouldDisplayFieldError = useMemo(() => {
	if (!props.isEditingSplitBill) {
	return false;
	}

	return (props.hasSmartScanFailed && TransactionUtils.hasMissingSmartscanFields(transaction)) \|\| (didConfirmSplit && TransactionUtils.areRequiredFieldsEmpty(transaction));

[HOLD for payment 2024-03-13] [$500] Split - "Enter a merchant name" error message appears while scanning is in process #34916

Description

Action Performed:

Expected Result:

Actual Result:

Workaround:

Platforms:

Screenshots/Videos

Activity

melvin-bot commented on Jan 22, 2024

lanitochka17 commented on Jan 22, 2024

dukenv0307 commented on Jan 23, 2024

Proposal

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

What is the root cause of that problem?

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

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

jeremy-croff commented on Jan 23, 2024

bernhardoj commented on Jan 23, 2024

Proposal

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

What is the root cause of that problem?

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

neonbhai commented on Jan 24, 2024

Proposal

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

What is the root cause of that problem?

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

Result:

Alternatively

neonbhai commented on Jan 24, 2024

situchan commented on Jan 24, 2024

melvin-bot commented on Jan 30, 2024

melvin-bot commented on Feb 1, 2024

86 remaining items

srikarparsi commented on Mar 26, 2024

srikarparsi commented on Apr 2, 2024

melvin-bot commented on Apr 5, 2024

anmurali commented on Apr 9, 2024

melvin-bot commented on Apr 12, 2024

melvin-bot commented on Apr 16, 2024

anmurali commented on Apr 17, 2024

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions