fix: no RBR when deleting distance rates by daledah · Pull Request #57767 · Expensify/App

daledah · 2025-03-04T15:56:29Z

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #57579
PROPOSAL: #57579 (comment)

Tests

Enable distance rate and create several rates
Create a distance expense with a rate
Go to Settings -> WS -> Distance rate
Delete the rate of the expense created.
Go to LHN
Verify that: RBR appears in WS chat
Go to WS chat -> Open transaction detail
Verify that: Error shown in Distance rate field

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Enable distance rate and create several rates
Create a distance expense with a rate
Go to Settings -> WS -> Distance rate
Delete the rate of the expense created.
Go to LHN
Verify that: RBR appears in WS chat
Go to WS chat -> Open transaction detail
Verify that: Error shown in Distance rate field

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screen.Recording.2025-03-04.at.22.49.56.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2025-03-04.at.22.47.45.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2025-03-04.at.22.45.57.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-03-04.at.22.43.55.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-03-04.at.22.41.34.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2025-03-04.at.22.39.38.mov

melvin-bot · 2025-03-04T16:12:22Z

@paultsimura 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]

aldo-expensify · 2025-03-05T01:58:52Z

src/libs/actions/Policy/DistanceRate.ts

+    const transactions = Object.values(allTransactions ?? {}).filter((transaction) => transaction?.comment?.customUnit?.customUnitID === customUnit.customUnitID);
+    const optimisticTransactionsViolations: OnyxUpdate[] = [];


We should check that these transaction actually belong to reports that are associated to the policy with policyID

We probably should check for the report state/status too. I don't think we want to add violations we can't resolve to reports have already been payed for example.

We should check that these transaction actually belong to reports that are associated to the policy with policyID

We filter transactions using customUnit.customUnitID so it will filter out other policy transactions as well.

We probably should check for the report state/status too. I don't think we want to add violations we can't resolve to reports have already been payed for example.

Violation also appear on paid expense

I can confirm: we add a violation, but do not show the RBR in LHN for paid requests:

We should check that these transaction actually belong to reports that are associated to the policy with policyID

We filter transactions using customUnit.customUnitID so it will filter out other policy transactions as well.

customUnitID are not necessarily unique across workspaces, but I see now that we generate them randomly with a shape like 52F16411C502C so it is VERY unlikely to have collisions. Considering that, I think we can ignore checking the policyID.

We probably should check for the report state/status too. I don't think we want to add violations we can't resolve to reports have already been payed for example.

Violation also appear on paid expense

Ahh nice, I didn't know :)

I can confirm: we add a violation, but do not show the RBR in LHN for paid requests:

Thanks for confirming @paultsimura !

…sper" This reverts commit 4529623.

paultsimura · 2025-03-05T15:54:17Z

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

chrome.webm

iOS: Native

Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.-.2025-03-05.at.16.50.35.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.-.2025-03-05.at.16.34.41.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-03-05.at.16.09.39.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2025-03-05.at.16.18.47.mov

paultsimura

LGTM ✔️

OSBotify · 2025-03-05T20:03:01Z

✋ 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 · 2025-03-06T23:16:05Z

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

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

github-actions · 2025-03-10T21:11:37Z

🚀 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 ❌

ikevin127 · 2025-07-21T23:49:32Z

src/libs/actions/Policy/DistanceRate.ts

        },
    ];

+    const transactions = Object.values(allTransactions ?? {}).filter((transaction) => transaction?.comment?.customUnit?.customUnitID === customUnit.customUnitID);


This line logic is setting violations for all transactions with the specific customUnitID instead of checking for the customUnitRateID which led to this issue:

[Due for payment 2025-07-25] [$250] Expense - When deleting distance rate, error appears in two expenses with different rates #65370

which we fixed by filtering for transactions with customUnitRateID as the deleted one.

fix: no RBR when deleting distance rates

b070148

daledah marked this pull request as ready for review March 4, 2025 16:12

daledah requested a review from a team as a code owner March 4, 2025 16:12

melvin-bot bot requested review from paultsimura and removed request for a team March 4, 2025 16:12

daledah mentioned this pull request Mar 4, 2025

[Due for payment 2025-03-17] [$250] No RBR in the report shown immediately when deleting selected rate #57579

Closed

8 tasks

aldo-expensify requested changes Mar 5, 2025

View reviewed changes

daledah added 3 commits March 5, 2025 10:10

Merge branch 'main' into fix/57579

27de0ff

fix: show #admin room when invite user through actionable whisper

4529623

Revert "fix: show #admin room when invite user through actionable whi…

e792ff9

…sper" This reverts commit 4529623.

paultsimura approved these changes Mar 5, 2025

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from aldo-expensify March 5, 2025 16:01

aldo-expensify approved these changes Mar 5, 2025

View reviewed changes

aldo-expensify merged commit 3f3fd8d into Expensify:main Mar 5, 2025
19 checks passed

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

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

Closed

93 tasks

paultsimura mentioned this pull request Mar 17, 2025

feat: policy distance rates edit #38237

Merged

50 tasks

ikevin127 reviewed Jul 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

fix: no RBR when deleting distance rates#57767

fix: no RBR when deleting distance rates#57767
aldo-expensify merged 4 commits intoExpensify:mainfrom
daledah:fix/57579

daledah commented Mar 4, 2025

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 4, 2025

Uh oh!

aldo-expensify Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

aldo-expensify Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

daledah Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

paultsimura Mar 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

aldo-expensify Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

paultsimura commented Mar 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

paultsimura left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 10, 2025

Uh oh!

ikevin127 Jul 21, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

		const transactions = Object.values(allTransactions ?? {}).filter((transaction) => transaction?.comment?.customUnit?.customUnitID === customUnit.customUnitID);
		const optimisticTransactionsViolations: OnyxUpdate[] = [];

Conversation

daledah commented Mar 4, 2025

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 4, 2025

Uh oh!

aldo-expensify Mar 5, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

aldo-expensify Mar 5, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

daledah Mar 5, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

paultsimura Mar 5, 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!

aldo-expensify Mar 5, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

paultsimura 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!

paultsimura left a comment

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!

github-actions bot commented Mar 10, 2025

Uh oh!

ikevin127 Jul 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

paultsimura Mar 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading

paultsimura commented Mar 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading