Show/hide delete expense button based on Liability type for card transaction by narefyev91 · Pull Request #56877 · Expensify/App

narefyev91 · 2025-02-14T15:07:24Z

Explanation of Change

Liability type are currently coming for card transactions. We should show Delete expense button based on this prop

Fixed Issues

$ #56366
PROPOSAL: #56366 (comment)

Tests

Create new workspace.
Enable delay submissions.
Add new direct card feed.
Verify allow deleting transactions is disabled.
Assign a card with expenses.
Sync its transactions
Go to the workspace chat.
Verify that delete expense button is not shown

Verify additional places:

Go to search
Find expense report from steps above
Click on it to get details in right panel
Verify that delete button is not shown

Context menu button:

Go to chat in which expense was sent
Right click or long press on expense report to view context action menu.
Verify that delete button is not shown

Create new workspace.
Enable delay submissions.
Add new direct card feed.
Verify allow deleting transactions is enabled.
Assign a card with expenses.
Sync its transactions
Go to the workspace chat.
Verify that delete expense button is shown

Verify additional places:

Go to search
Find expense report from steps above
Click on it to get details in right panel
Verify that delete button is shown

Context menu button:

Go to chat in which expense was sent
Right click or long press on expense report to view context action menu.
Verify that delete button is shown

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

No changes

QA Steps

Same as tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

android.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

android-web.mov

iOS: Native

ios.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios-web.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mov

MacOS: Desktop

desktop.mov

melvin-bot · 2025-02-14T15:07:31Z

@ntdiary 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]

src/pages/ReportDetailsPage.tsx

…d-expense

ntdiary · 2025-02-27T14:45:14Z

src/pages/ReportDetailsPage.tsx

+    const isCardTransaction = isCardTransactionTransactionUtils(transaction);
+
+    const isAllowToDeleteTransaction = !isCardTransaction || (isCardTransaction && transaction?.comment?.liabilityType === CONST.TRANSACTION.LIABILITY_TYPE.ALLOW);
+    const shouldShowDeleteButton = isCardTransaction ? isAllowToDeleteTransaction : shouldShowTaskDeleteButton || canDeleteRequest;


looks like the condition here is actually isCardTransaction ? transaction?.comment?.liabilityType === CONST.TRANSACTION.LIABILITY_TYPE.ALLOW : shouldShowTaskDeleteButton || canDeleteRequest ?
BTW, should we also update the Delete expense option in the context menu? or address that in a separate issue?

might need to add some similar logic here as well.

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Lines 2168 to 2181 in 5c4dc1c

if (isMoneyRequestAction(reportAction)) {

// For now, users cannot delete split actions

const isSplitAction = getOriginalMessage(reportAction)?.type === CONST.IOU.REPORT_ACTION_TYPE.SPLIT;

if (isSplitAction) {

return false;

}

if (isActionOwner) {

if (!isEmptyObject(report) && (isMoneyRequestReport(report) || isInvoiceReport(report))) {

return canDeleteTransaction(report);

}

return true;

}

Yes i think we should update the logic there and the logic on Search page too - you can also delete expense from there

Yeah from search page we using the same component "Details page" - which already has that logic:

Let me know if that's not only place to take a look... did not find anything else in search area

@mountiny updated all places

Yes i think we should update the logic there and the logic on Search page too - you can also delete expense from there

This Delete option?

@ntdiary @narefyev91 yes

I think in this particular case Delete button reference on API data - for transaction it's coming prop - canDelete: boolean.

I see that liabilityType is being returned. maybe either fix it on the backend to ensure canDelete has the correct value, or consider adding a liabilityType sub-condition on the frontend? I don’t have a strong preference. :D

if BE already knows that transaction type will be corporate - i think the flag canDelete should also follows the same pattern. @mountiny do you think it will be possible to add check on BE side?

Ok, I personally agree that it’s better for the backend to return the correct value and keep it as the source of truth. :)

…d-expense

mountiny · 2025-03-02T22:06:33Z

@narefyev91 please add test steps for all the places the expense can be deleted from

@ntdiary please proceed with testing and checklist now

tests/ui/ReportDetailsPageTest.tsx

src/pages/home/report/ContextMenu/ContextMenuActions.tsx

src/pages/ReportDetailsPage.tsx

ntdiary

just FYI, if the client doesn't load the child IOU action data, moneyRequestAction might be undefined. And I think this problem can be handled in a separate ticket, as there doesn’t seem to be a good way to address it at the moment.

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

src/pages/home/report/ContextMenu/ContextMenuActions.tsx

…d-expense

ntdiary · 2025-03-05T10:23:50Z

@narefyev91, also needs to add moneyRequestAction here. :)
https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/56877/files#diff-390b4b7a2bc224f07a97353ccafa38c838810afa909b43c3a491852fa903daceR771

ntdiary · 2025-03-05T10:27:27Z

Reviewer Checklist

I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
- I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
- I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
- I verified the steps cover any possible 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 checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
I verified that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android: Native
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
- MacOS: Desktop
If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
I verified proper code patterns were followed (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 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
- 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 either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
- 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 verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
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.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
If a new component is created I verified that:
- A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
- All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
- The file is named correctly
- The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
- The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
- For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
- Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
- All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
- The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
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 UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design 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.
For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this flow.
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.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

56877-android-native.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

56877-android-web.mov

iOS: Native

56877-ios-native.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

56877-ios-safari.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

56877-mac-chrome.mov

MacOS: Desktop

56877-mac-desktop.mov

ntdiary · 2025-03-05T10:32:53Z

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

-
    const isActionOwner = reportAction?.actorAccountID === currentUserAccountID;
    const policy = allPolicies?.[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.POLICY}${report?.policyID}`] ?? null;
+    const iouTransactionID = isMoneyRequestAction(reportAction) ? getOriginalMessage(reportAction)?.IOUTransactionID : '';


Not a blocker, just feel that if we can move this below isMoneyRequestAction(reportAction) , it could help us avoid some unnecessary fetches. I'll start filling the checklist in a few hours. :)

@narefyev91 might be good to follow up later

ntdiary

LGTM. And we might need to update the test steps based on this conv. The Delete option is now directly tied to the liabilityType in the transaction, not the feed settings. :D

cc @narefyev91 @mountiny

mountiny

@narefyev91 the comments are NAB and I would like to get this fixed sooner, can you though follow up in some future PR to clean the NABs up? thanks!

mountiny · 2025-03-05T20:21:27Z

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

-
    const isActionOwner = reportAction?.actorAccountID === currentUserAccountID;
    const policy = allPolicies?.[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.POLICY}${report?.policyID}`] ?? null;
+    const iouTransactionID = isMoneyRequestAction(reportAction) ? getOriginalMessage(reportAction)?.IOUTransactionID : '';


@narefyev91 might be good to follow up later

mountiny · 2025-03-05T20:24:47Z

src/pages/ReportDetailsPage.tsx

+    const [transaction] = useOnyx(`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION}${iouTransactionID || CONST.DEFAULT_NUMBER_ID}`);
+    const isCardTransaction = isCardTransactionTransactionUtils(transaction);
+
+    const shouldShowDeleteButton =


Could you also wrap the (!isCardTransaction || (isCardTransaction && transaction?.comment?.liabilityType === CONST.TRANSACTION.LIABILITY_TYPE.ALLOW)) condition to some helper method or variable? I feel like this is hard to read and its used in at least two places

OSBotify · 2025-03-05T20:37:33Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

github-actions · 2025-03-06T23:14:41Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.1.10-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	success ✅
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	success ✅

joekaufmanexpensify · 2025-03-10T18:21:13Z

Tests

Create new workspace.

Enable delay submissions.

Add new direct card feed.

Verify allow deleting transactions is disabled.

Assign a card with expenses.

Sync its transactions

Go to the workspace chat.

Verify that delete expense button is not shown

Verify additional places:

Go to search

Find expense report from steps above

Click on it to get details in right panel

Verify that delete button is not shown

Context menu button:

Go to chat in which expense was sent

Right click or long press on expense report to view context action menu.

Verify that delete button is not shown

Confirmed!

joekaufmanexpensify · 2025-03-10T18:30:54Z

Create new workspace.

Enable delay submissions.

Add new direct card feed.

Verify allow deleting transactions is enabled.

Assign a card with expenses.

Sync its transactions

Go to the workspace chat.

Verify that delete expense button is shown

Verify additional places:

Go to search

Find expense report from steps above

Click on it to get details in right panel

Verify that delete button is shown

Context menu button:

Go to chat in which expense was sent

Right click or long press on expense report to view context action menu.

Verify that delete button is shown

This case is not working. No option to delete transactions if allow deleting transactions is toggled on before assigning card.

2025-03-10_14-30-06.mp4

joekaufmanexpensify · 2025-03-10T18:31:34Z

Still checked this off as IDT it needs to block deploy.

github-actions · 2025-03-10T21:10:13Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.1.10-6 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	true ❌
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	failure ❌
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	failure ❌

joekaufmanexpensify · 2025-03-12T13:04:20Z

There was a BE issue preventing the delete case from working. We fixed it and retested, and it's working now!

ntdiary · 2025-03-12T13:19:16Z

There was a BE issue preventing the delete case from working. We fixed it and retested, and it's working now!

There are still some issues on the FE that need to be resolved.

Show/hide delete expense button based on feed settings for Company cards

e1586d2

narefyev91 requested a review from a team as a code owner February 14, 2025 15:07

melvin-bot bot requested review from ntdiary and removed request for a team February 14, 2025 15:07

mountiny assigned narefyev91 Feb 17, 2025

mountiny requested changes Feb 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/pages/ReportDetailsPage.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

narefyev91 added 4 commits February 27, 2025 10:06

Merge branch 'refs/heads/main' into hide-delete-expense-button-if-car…

b5600cd

…d-expense

show/hide button based on transaction liability

ea2eb87

prettier

db6e038

fix ts

658078e

narefyev91 requested a review from mountiny February 27, 2025 09:27

ntdiary reviewed Feb 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

narefyev91 added 6 commits February 27, 2025 16:57

update condition

f04c256

remove ability to show delete button in context menu

fb471bb

fix empty transaction

089e966

Merge branch 'refs/heads/main' into hide-delete-expense-button-if-car…

ba8fa7e

…d-expense

fix jest

3cb14b6

fix jest

78a5666

narefyev91 requested a review from ntdiary February 28, 2025 10:50

mountiny requested changes Mar 2, 2025

View reviewed changes

tests/ui/ReportDetailsPageTest.tsx Show resolved Hide resolved

ntdiary reviewed Mar 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/pages/home/report/ContextMenu/ContextMenuActions.tsx Show resolved Hide resolved

add unit test

20f09c3

narefyev91 requested a review from mountiny March 3, 2025 12:50

show delete button for card transaction report

5c5ffa0

ntdiary reviewed Mar 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/pages/ReportDetailsPage.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

narefyev91 added 2 commits March 4, 2025 17:11

update condition for report details page

c60107a

update condition for context menu

1b4744c

narefyev91 requested a review from ntdiary March 4, 2025 15:31

ntdiary suggested changes Mar 5, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts Show resolved Hide resolved

src/pages/home/report/ContextMenu/ContextMenuActions.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

narefyev91 added 5 commits March 5, 2025 10:16

Merge branch 'refs/heads/main' into hide-delete-expense-button-if-car…

5b32275

…d-expense

update after c+ review

53e8d25

prettier

0ef4703

ts

e15f660

fix jest

dbca006

narefyev91 requested a review from ntdiary March 5, 2025 08:48

add missing money request

2807ce8

ntdiary reviewed Mar 5, 2025

View reviewed changes

ntdiary approved these changes Mar 5, 2025

View reviewed changes

narefyev91 changed the title ~~Show/hide delete expense button based on feed settings for Company cards~~ Show/hide delete expense button based on Liability type for card transaction Mar 5, 2025

mountiny added the InternalQA This pull request required internal QA label Mar 5, 2025

mountiny approved these changes Mar 5, 2025

View reviewed changes

mountiny merged commit 8d88549 into Expensify:main Mar 5, 2025
23 of 24 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Mar 6, 2025

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2025-03-06 #57963

Closed

93 tasks

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Mar 10, 2025

[Due for payment 2025-03-21] [Due for payment 2025-03-17] [$250] "Company Cards: 'Allow Deleting Transactions' Toggle Not Functioning Correctly, Dependent on 'Delay Submissions' Setting" #56366

Closed

8 tasks

	if (isMoneyRequestAction(reportAction)) {
	// For now, users cannot delete split actions
	const isSplitAction = getOriginalMessage(reportAction)?.type === CONST.IOU.REPORT_ACTION_TYPE.SPLIT;

	if (isSplitAction) {
	return false;
	}

	if (isActionOwner) {
	if (!isEmptyObject(report) && (isMoneyRequestReport(report) \|\| isInvoiceReport(report))) {
	return canDeleteTransaction(report);
	}
	return true;
	}

Conversation

narefyev91 commented Feb 14, 2025 • edited by mountiny Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 14, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ntdiary Feb 27, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Mar 2, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ntdiary left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ntdiary commented Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

ntdiary commented Mar 5, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ntdiary left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

joekaufmanexpensify commented Mar 10, 2025

Uh oh!

joekaufmanexpensify commented Mar 10, 2025

Uh oh!

joekaufmanexpensify commented Mar 10, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 10, 2025

narefyev91 commented Feb 14, 2025 •

edited by mountiny

Loading

ntdiary Feb 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading

ntdiary commented Mar 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading

ntdiary left a comment •

edited

Loading