[Regression test steps needed] [$1000] Request/Send money available in default-rooms/chatrooms with 2 members, error if used.

[kavimuru]

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

---

Action Performed:

1. FAB -> Create workspace.
2. Settings -> Workspaces -> Manage members. Ensure it has exactly two members.
3. Open #admin or #announce room, click + and notice that Request/Send money options are available.
4. Select Request money -> Enter any amount -> Select Next -> Select Request

Expected Result:

Request/Send money options should not be available in default rooms.

Actual Result:

Request/Send money options are available, using them results in error.

Workaround:

unknown

Platform:

Where is this issue occurring?

• Web
• iOS
• Android
• Desktop App
• Mobile Web

Version Number:
Reproducible in staging?:
Reproducible in production?:
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers):
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Notes/Photos/Videos: Any additional supporting documentation
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @Ollyws

RequestSendMoneyBug.mp4

Recording.1015.mp4

Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1669560477526229

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0188ec5bdeb4f1e5b7
• Upwork Job ID: 1597173028123549696

[melvin-bot]

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

[Ollyws]

Proposal

To disable Request/Send money in default rooms and chatrooms (where this error also occurs) we can place:

+  if (ReportUtils.isChatRoom(this.props.report)) {
+              return [];
+  }

in ReportActionCompose here. This will show Add attachment if there are less than 3 users, otherwise it will also show Split bill.

If we just wanted to disable it for default rooms we could use ReportUtils.isDefaultRoom() instead, but the error is present all chatrooms.

[Puneet-here]

I think the send and request money option is expected the error part is a bug. You can check the steps at this PR

[Ollyws]

@Puneet-here see this comment by @kavimuru https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1669572954511569?thread_ts=1669560477.526229&cid=C049HHMV9SM

[Puneet-here]

Proposal

If we wanna remove send and request money option then we will need to remove them from chat rooms (default and user created) and also from the policy expense chat.
Add this code at line 286

        if (ReportUtils.isChatRoom(this.props.report) || ReportUtils.isPolicyExpenseChat(this.props.report)) {
            return iouOptions;
        }

App/src/pages/home/report/ReportActionCompose.js

Lines 279 to 286 in 17c34e3

	if (hasMultipleParticipants) {
	return [{
	icon: Expensicons.Receipt,
	text: this.props.translate('iou.splitBill'),
	onSelected: () => Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.getIouSplitRoute(this.props.reportID)),
	}];
	}

[dylanexpensify]

Can replicate, making external

[dylanexpensify]

From  this  SO: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418

• The "bug" is actually a bug: 
• The bug is not a duplicate report of an existing GH (close the GH and add any novel details to the original GH instead): 
• The bug is reproducible, following  the  reproduction steps:
• If you’re unable to reproduce the bug, add the Needs reproduction label. Comment on the issue outlining the steps you took to try to reproduce the bug, your results and tag the issue reporter and the Applause QA member who created the issue. Ask them to clarify reproduction steps and/or to check the reproduction steps again. Close issue.: 
• The GH template is filled out as fully as possible -- this means the GH body and title are clear (ie. could an external contributor understand it and work on it?): 
• The GH was created by an Expensify employee or a QA tester: 
• If the bug is an OldDot issue, you should decide whether it is widespread enough to justify fixing or it is better to wait for reunification. If it’s better to wait, close the GH & provide this justification: 
• If there's a link to Slack, check the discussion to see if we decided not to fix it: 
• Decide if the GH should be resolved by an External contributor or Internal engineer, add the appropriate label:

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0188ec5bdeb4f1e5b7

[melvin-bot]

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