[$1000] Split bill - "Payment details not found" for a split with 1 person

[kbecciv]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Action Performed:

1. Login to NewDot
2. Click + -> Split Bill
3. Input amount and click continue
4. Select 1 attendee
5. Submit Split Bill
6. Click in "split $XX for description" link in chat

Expected Result:

Payment details should be displayed (or link should be not clickable)

Actual Result:

"Payment details not found" error page is displayed

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

• Android / native
• Android / Chrome
• iOS / native
• iOS / Safari
• Windows / Chrome
• MacOS / Desktop

Version Number: 1.3.12.0

Reproducible in staging?: Yes

Reproducible in production?: No, in provided build

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

Notes/Photos/Videos: Any additional supporting documentation

Bug6048676_video_28.mp4

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:

Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team

Slack conversation:

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01e7c0e8f33a8afe00
• Upwork Job ID: 1658164498367459328
• Last Price Increase: 2023-05-15

[kbecciv]

Issue is not reproductible in provided build https://18652.pr-testing.expensify.com/

Recording.2672.mp4

[OSBotify]

👋 Friendly reminder that deploy blockers are time-sensitive ⏱ issues! Check out the open StagingDeployCash deploy checklist to see the list of PRs included in this release, then work quickly to do one of the following:

1. Identify the pull request that introduced this issue and revert it.
2. Find someone who can quickly fix the issue.
3. Fix the issue yourself.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @aldo-expensify (Engineering), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4319 for more details.

[aldo-expensify]

Reproduced in production:

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @bfitzexpensify (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details.

[melvin-bot]

Bug0 Triage Checklist (Main S/O)

• This "bug" occurs on a supported platform (ensure Platforms in OP are ✅)
• This bug is not a duplicate report (check E/App issues and #expensify-bugs)
  • If it is, comment with a link to the original report, close the issue and add any novel details to the original issue instead
• This bug is reproducible using the reproduction steps in the OP. S/O
  • If the reproduction steps are clear and you're unable to reproduce the bug, check with the reporter and QA first, then close the issue.
  • If the reproduction steps aren't clear and you determine the correct steps, please update the OP.
• This issue is filled out as thoroughly and clearly as possible
  • Pay special attention to the title, results, platforms where the bug occurs, and if the bug happens on staging/production.
• I have reviewed and subscribed to the linked Slack conversation to ensure Slack/Github stay in sync

[hungvu193]

I think this is backend issue, with split request, the IOUReportID is not found inside originalMessage object.

[wildan-m]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

Split bill - "Payment details not found" for a split with 1 person

What is the root cause of that problem?

We haven't defined what to show when performing a split bill with 1 person.

Previously, the split text isn't clickable and now we are making it clickable on purpose, have a look at this PR.

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

According to the PR, for the split bill, we'll show the participant page at the moment.

Then we can modify this line

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/IOUAction.js

Lines 72 to 79 in 45c3212

	const hasMultipleParticipants = props.chatReport.participants.length > 1;
	const onIOUPreviewPressed = () => {
	if (hasMultipleParticipants) {
	Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.getReportParticipantsRoute(props.chatReportID));
	} else {
	Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.getIouDetailsRoute(props.chatReportID, props.action.originalMessage.IOUReportID));
	}
	};

To

    const isBillSplit = lodashGet(props, 'action.originalMessage.type') === 'split';
    const hasMultipleParticipants = props.chatReport.participants.length > 1;
    const onIOUPreviewPressed = () => {
        if (hasMultipleParticipants || isBillSplit) {
            Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.getReportParticipantsRoute(props.chatReportID));
        } else {
            Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.getIouDetailsRoute(props.chatReportID, props.action.originalMessage.IOUReportID));
        }
    };

Also determining isSplitBill with room participants' length isn't reliable, it will not true if we split bill with only one person. Then we can change:

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/IOUAction.js

Line 109 in 45c3212

isBillSplit={hasMultipleParticipants}

To:

                    isBillSplit={isBillSplit}

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

[melvin-bot]

Looks like something related to react-navigation may have been mentioned in this issue discussion.

As a reminder, please make sure that all proposals are not workarounds and that any and all attempt to fix the issue holistically have been made before proceeding with a solution. Proposals to change our DeprecatedCustomActions.js files should not be accepted.

Feel free to drop a note in #expensify-open-source with any questions.

[pecanoro]

I think this has been solved already as I can't reproduce it anymore on staging or dev.

[pecanoro]

Ahh nvm, it is broken for the split even if the requested part is working.

[pecanoro]

Not sure if this is going to be gone after the refactor is over for manual requests.

Nvm, looks like a legit bug

[pecanoro]

This is the page that is supposed to be opening but for some reason, it opens the wrong one with only one participant:

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01e7c0e8f33a8afe00

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @bfitzexpensify is eligible for the External assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @sobitneupane (External)

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @aldo-expensify is eligible for the External assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[aldo-expensify]

@sobitneupane can you check this proposal: #18682 (comment)

I think it may be pointing to the right thing

[aldo-expensify]

cc @luacmartins as you know better the split flow. Can you confirm if this makes sense: #18682 (comment) or if it is fine in this case to be treating the split with 1 participant as a regular IOU? If it is the later, I think @hungvu193 's comment here may be right then.

[luacmartins]

@aldo-expensify that comment makes sense, but we are already addressing it here

[aldo-expensify]

@luacmartins ahh, thanks! I'll close this one then.