fix: Unable to send a reply in thread after leaving the thread in offline mode

[tienifr]

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #34424
PROPOSAL: #34424 (comment)

Tests

1. Go to workspace chat
2. Go offline.
3. Send a message and reply in thread.
4. Leave the thread.
5. Open the thread and send a reply again.
6. Verify that user is able to send a reply in thread after leaving the thread in offline mode.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as above

QA Steps

1. Go to workspace chat
2. Go offline.
3. Send a message and reply in thread.
4. Leave the thread.
5. Open the thread and send a reply again.
6. Verify that user is able to send a reply in thread after leaving the thread in offline mode.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • MacOS: Desktop
• I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
• I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
  • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
  • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
  • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
  • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
• I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• If any new file was added I verified that:
  • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • A similar style doesn't already exist
  • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
• If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• If the PR modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label so the design team can review the changes.
• If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screen.Recording.2024-02-06.at.11.18.27.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2024-02-06.at.11.15.17.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2024-02-06.at.11.22.57.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-02-06.at.11.11.02.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-02-06.at.10.48.32.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2024-02-06.at.10.54.45.mp4

[melvin-bot]

@mollfpr Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[mollfpr]

I found an issue with the left thread and sent a message afterward. It shows an error and the message is not saved.

1. Open a thread and send a message there
2. Go offline
3. Go back to the thread and leave the thread
4. Open the thread again and send a message

Screen.Recording.2024-02-06.at.18.23.56.mp4

This might be BE-related, but it doesn't reproduce on the created thread while offline.

[mollfpr]

@grgia Could you help check the API for LeaveRoom? We have this issue that it seems the API is deleting the report. Thank you!

[tienifr]

@grgia Waiting for your response above^

[tienifr]

@grgia Can you help check the above question when you have a chance? Thanks

[grgia]

@tienifr apologies, I was OOO. Looking now

[grgia]

Could you help check the API for LeaveRoom? We have this #35869 (comment) that it seems the API is deleting the report. Thank you!

@mollfpr no we don't delete the report in LeaveRoom we only set the notification preference and participants.

Could you rephrase the question? Perhaps @blimpich or @srikarparsi can chime in as well since theyve worked on that command recently

[blimpich]

Yeah that Report no longer exists is misleading. That is actually a 404 Report not found error under the hood. You can see in that video that when you go back online the api?command=LeaveRoom gets called before api?command=AddComment. So the user no longer has access to the report and therefore when they try to comment on it they get a 404.

[mollfpr]

Thank you @grgia and @blimpich for jumping in!

---

So the user no longer has access to the report and therefore when they try to comment on it they get a 404.

@blimpich I guess the behavior is expected here #35869 (comment)?

[blimpich]

I don't know if this is intended behavior per-say. The user should be able to comment on that report since it is a child report of the room that they have access to. It just seems like when the user is offline the backend decides that they don't have access to the thread but when they are online the backend (correctly) thinks that they do.

@tienifr solution looks like it provides the correct behavior, but by fixing the frontend bug we seem to have revealed a separate backend bug.

@grgia up to you but I'd probably make an internal hot pick bug for #vip-vsb for issue described here. They will need to use tienifr:fix/34424 as their frontend branch in order to test it though. Then hold on this issue until that is done.

Or, since this is a edge case, we could push this through knowing we have this bug and just create an issue for it for an Expensify Engineer to handle. Those are my thoughts.

[tienifr]

@blimpich Agree 👍, can you help add hold label on the issue? Thanks

[mollfpr]

Or, since this is a edge case, we could push this through knowing we have this bug and just create an issue for it for an Expensify Engineer to handle.

I think we can push through this PR to be merged first if we have the separate issue created.

[tienifr]

@mollfpr @blimpich This issue is fixed by #37355. We can close the PR?

[mollfpr]

Yeah, I checked and the issue is fixed by #37355. I think we can close this PR and continue discussion how to move forward in the issue?