[Due for payment 2025-02-13] Approver is showing as travel booking member

[m-natarajan]

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:
Reproducible in staging?:
Reproducible in production?:
If this was caught on HybridApp, is this reproducible on New Expensify Standalone?:
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: @JmillsExpensify
Slack conversation (hyperlinked to channel name): travel

Action Performed:

1. Book a trip as a member of the room
2. Open the expense details

Expected Result:

Should show member avatar in the expense details

Actual Result:

Showing approver avatar as if they booked travel

Workaround:

unknown

Platforms:

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

• Android: Standalone
• Android: HybridApp
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Standalone
• iOS: HybridApp
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Please refer to OP for the screenshots

View all open jobs on GitHub

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @zanyrenney

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @zanyrenney (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.

[MelvinBot]

This has been labelled "Needs Reproduction". Follow the steps here: https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/16989

[blazejkustra]

Hey! I’m Błażej Kustra from Software Mansion, an expert agency, recently I've been working on all travel related issues with @shubham1206agra as a C+ as we both have access to travel workspaces.

[blazejkustra]

Update: I have a fix but I want to better understand why was this implemented like this in the first place. This PR implemented the current logic and they had a similar problem