Fix can't mark one-expense report as unread by bernhardoj · Pull Request #56893 · Expensify/App

bernhardoj · 2025-02-15T04:57:46Z

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #55614
PROPOSAL: #55614 (comment)

Tests

Same as QA Steps

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as QA Steps

QA Steps

Open a workspace chat without unsettled expense
Create a new money request
Open the one-expense report
Send a message
Mark the report as unread from LHN
Verify the sent message is marked as unread and LHN is bold
Reopen the report until the LHN is not bold and the new message green line is gone
Edit the money request so a system message is shown
Mark the report as unread from LHN
Verify the system message is marked as unread and LHN is bold

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

android.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

android.mweb.mp4

iOS: Native

ios.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios.mweb.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

desktop.mp4

melvin-bot · 2025-02-15T04:57:51Z

@akinwale 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]

akinwale · 2025-02-22T12:08:50Z

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 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

56893-ios-native.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

56893-ios-safari.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

56893-web.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

56893-desktop.mp4

akinwale

LGTM.

NAB, but references to oneTransactionThreadReport can be better named as singleTransactionThreadReport.

dangrous

This is looking good, a couple notes:

I agree with @akinwale, let's update OneTransaction to SingleTransaction - I know we used OneTransaction before but I think Single will be clearer
Can you add a comment to the new iSunRead describing a little about the new second param? I feel like people might get confused looking at that in the future.
Had one question about the test changes.

Otherwise I think we're almost there!

tests/actions/ReportTest.ts

bernhardoj · 2025-02-25T02:37:05Z

let's update OneTransaction to SingleTransaction - I know we used OneTransaction before but I think Single will be clearer

Hmm, if we change it, won't it be confusing because we will now have singleTransaction and oneTransaction?

singleTransactionThreadReport
oneTransactionThreadReport
isFromOneTransactionReport
isOneTransactionReport
etc.

bernhardoj · 2025-02-25T02:47:32Z

Can you add a comment to the new iSunRead describing a little about the new second param? I feel like people might get confused looking at that in the future.

added

akinwale · 2025-02-25T04:03:52Z

let's update OneTransaction to SingleTransaction - I know we used OneTransaction before but I think Single will be clearer

Hmm, if we change it, won't it be confusing because we will now have singleTransaction and oneTransaction?

singleTransactionThreadReport oneTransactionThreadReport isFromOneTransactionReport isOneTransactionReport etc.

I think in these cases (if this is code in this PR), it would be appropriate to rename them isFromSingleTransactionReport, isSingleTransactionReport, etc. If it's existing code, then perhaps it makes sense to leave as is. Will let @dangrous decide.

dangrous · 2025-02-25T22:06:24Z

Yeah I guess we leave it - I like Single better BUT we mostly use One in the existing code, so yeah it's best to keep it consistent!

dangrous

One final question about the tests, but I think it's not a blocker. Let me know!

dangrous · 2025-02-25T22:09:31Z

tests/actions/ReportTest.ts

+        // eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-return
+        jest.doMock('@libs/EmojiUtils', () => ({
+            ...jest.requireActual('@libs/EmojiUtils'),
+            hasAccountIDEmojiReacted: jest.fn(() => true),
+        }));


Apologies about that other comment - I think I meant to ask about THIS change, not the one above. Was this a lint thing?

Ah, yes, this is because the lint complaint when we import
import * as EmojiUtils from '@libs/EmojiUtils';

so we can't do jest.spyOn(EmojiUtils, 'hasAccountIDEmojiReacted') anymore. So instead, I mock the whole module using doMock (so it's mocked for this test case only), but only mock the hasAccountIDEmojiReacted function.

ah okay cool, thank you for explaining!

dangrous · 2025-02-26T18:28:41Z

Can you fix the conflicts and then we should be good to go here? Thanks!

bernhardoj · 2025-02-27T04:11:35Z

@dangrous fixed

dangrous · 2025-02-27T16:07:43Z

argh they're back. I didn't get there in time!

bernhardoj · 2025-02-28T01:28:45Z

@dangrous and they're gone now

OSBotify · 2025-03-03T17:06:02Z

✋ 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 · 2025-03-04T22:08:55Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/dangrous in version: 9.1.9-0 🚀

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

github-actions · 2025-03-04T22:52:02Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/dangrous in version: 9.1.9-0 🚀

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

github-actions · 2025-03-06T22:55:18Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 9.1.9-8 🚀

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

fix can't mark one-expense report as unread

cf8298f

bernhardoj requested a review from a team as a code owner February 15, 2025 04:57

melvin-bot bot requested review from akinwale and removed request for a team February 15, 2025 04:57

bernhardoj added 7 commits February 15, 2025 13:18

lint

5330df7

fix type

3dfe81d

rename variable

a22ba29

fix test

5537ac8

fix test

3ca4b13

fix test again

02eb25f

lint and test

7f7357b

akinwale approved these changes Feb 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from dangrous February 24, 2025 06:21

dangrous requested changes Feb 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

tests/actions/ReportTest.ts Show resolved Hide resolved

add comment

275151c

bernhardoj added 2 commits February 25, 2025 10:48

Merge branch 'main' into fix/55614-mark-as-unread-iou-report

7db7caa

fix type

be82f5a

dangrous previously approved these changes Feb 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'main' into fix/55614-mark-as-unread-iou-report

1d2f7b5

Merge branch 'main' into fix/55614-mark-as-unread-iou-report

b0742db

bernhardoj dismissed dangrous’s stale review via b0742db February 27, 2025 04:11

Merge branch 'main' into fix/55614-mark-as-unread-iou-report

3f112a6

dangrous approved these changes Mar 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

dangrous merged commit 4335371 into Expensify:main Mar 3, 2025
16 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Mar 4, 2025

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2025-03-04 #57792

Closed

77 tasks

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Mar 6, 2025

[Due for payment 2025-03-13] [$250] LHN - Mark as unread doesn't work with IOU report #55614

Closed

8 tasks

VickyStash mentioned this pull request Mar 21, 2025

[Due for payment 2025-11-03] [$125] Do not create optimistic transaction thread report on RequestMoney #58828

Closed

FitseTLT mentioned this pull request Jul 11, 2025

[$500] [HOLD on retest] New message marker displayed when revisiting expense report #65645

Closed

8 tasks

shubham1206agra mentioned this pull request Jan 28, 2026

feat: [Insights] [Release 2] Top Merchants - Add group-by:merchant and suggested search #80672

Merged

54 tasks

Conversation

bernhardoj commented Feb 15, 2025 • edited 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 15, 2025

Uh oh!

akinwale commented Feb 22, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

akinwale left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dangrous left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bernhardoj commented Feb 25, 2025

Uh oh!

bernhardoj commented Feb 25, 2025

Uh oh!

akinwale commented Feb 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

dangrous commented Feb 25, 2025

Uh oh!

dangrous left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dangrous Feb 25, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

bernhardoj Feb 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dangrous Feb 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dangrous commented Feb 26, 2025

Uh oh!

bernhardoj commented Feb 27, 2025

Uh oh!

dangrous commented Feb 27, 2025

Uh oh!

bernhardoj commented Feb 28, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Mar 3, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 4, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 4, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

bernhardoj commented Feb 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading

akinwale commented Feb 22, 2025 •

edited

Loading

akinwale commented Feb 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading