[Awaiting checklist] [$250] mWeb - Chat - Chat not autoscrolled when categorized expense is sent to chat with content.

[IuliiaHerets]

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

---

Version Number: 9.0.75-0
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: Yes
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: #52221
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): ibellicotest+91@gmail.com
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Device used: Motorola MotoG60 - Android 12
App Component: Money Requests

Action Performed:

Precondition: Workspace to submit categorized expense, must have an expense on it.

1. Open the staging.new.expensify.com
2. Open self DM and tap on the "+" button
3. Select "Track Expense" and complete the creation flow.
4. Once naviagted to chat again, tap on "Categorize it"
5. Select any category.
6. Add a merchant.
7. Submit the expense to a workspace that already has an expense or content on it.

Expected Result:

When categorizing an expense and submitting it to a workspace that already has content in it, the chat should be autoscrolled.

Actual Result:

Chat is not autoscrolled after categorizing an expense and submitting it to a workspace chat that already has an expense or content in it.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

• Android: Standalone
• Android: HybridApp
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Standalone
• iOS: HybridApp
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Bug6691800_1733981730882.Categorize.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021867328605330762929
• Upwork Job ID: 1867328605330762929
• Last Price Increase: 2025-01-02
• Automatic offers:
• shubham1206agra | Reviewer | 105580363

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @shubham1206agra

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @twisterdotcom (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[bernhardoj]

Proposal

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

The categorized track expense isn't shown fully because the chat isn't auto scrolled to the bottom.

What is the root cause of that problem?

This only happens with WS track expense. This issue happens when the report last action created value doesn't match the report lastVisibleActionCreated.

App/src/pages/home/report/ReportActionsView.tsx

Lines 301 to 302 in 50c1db8

	const hasNewestReportAction =
	visibleReportActions.at(0)?.created === report.lastVisibleActionCreated || visibleReportActions.at(0)?.created === transactionThreadReport?.lastVisibleActionCreated;

App/src/pages/home/report/ReportActionsView.tsx

Line 485 in 50c1db8

const shouldEnableAutoScroll = (hasNewestReportAction && (!reportActionID || !isNavigatingToLinkedMessage)) || (transactionThreadReport && !prevTransactionThreadReport);

When we create a track expense, including categorizing it, we don't update the lastVisibleActionCreated at all.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Lines 1507 to 1514 in 50c1db8

	onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
	key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${chatReport.reportID}`,
	value: {
	...chatReport,
	lastMessageText: ReportActionsUtils.getReportActionText(iouAction),
	lastMessageHtml: ReportActionsUtils.getReportActionHtml(iouAction),
	lastReadTime: DateUtils.getDBTime(),
	iouReportID: iouReport?.reportID,

This doesn't happen to, money requests, for example. If we see here, we don't set the lastVisibleActionCreated too for the money request.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Lines 696 to 702 in 50c1db8

	value: {
	...chat.report,
	lastReadTime: DateUtils.getDBTime(),
	lastMessageTranslationKey: '',
	iouReportID: iou.report.reportID,
	...outstandingChildRequest,
	...(isNewChatReport ? {pendingFields: {createChat: CONST.RED_BRICK_ROAD_PENDING_ACTION.ADD}} : {}),

But we actually mutate the chat report lastVisibleActionCreated here when a new report preview is created.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Lines 2339 to 2343 in 50c1db8

	if (reportPreviewAction) {
	reportPreviewAction = ReportUtils.updateReportPreview(iouReport, reportPreviewAction, false, comment, optimisticTransaction);
	} else {
	reportPreviewAction = ReportUtils.buildOptimisticReportPreview(chatReport, iouReport, comment, optimisticTransaction);
	chatReport.lastVisibleActionCreated = reportPreviewAction.created;

Also, if we do a track expense directly on the WS (without going through Categorize flow), then it works fine even though we don't update the lastVisibleActionCreated. That's because we trigger notifyNewAction which will scroll the chat to the bottom.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Line 4119 in 50c1db8

Report.notifyNewAction(activeReportID ?? '', payeeAccountID);

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

I don't like mutating the object and instead of using notifyNewAction, it's better to fix the root cause of the lastVisibleActionCreated optimistic data. So, to fix this, we can update the lastVisibleActionCreated to the report preview action if we are creating a new report preview.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Lines 1515 to 1523 in 8ed48d2

	onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
	key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${chatReport.reportID}`,
	value: {
	...chatReport,
	lastMessageText: ReportActionsUtils.getReportActionText(iouAction),
	lastMessageHtml: ReportActionsUtils.getReportActionHtml(iouAction),
	lastReadTime: DateUtils.getDBTime(),
	iouReportID: iouReport?.reportID,
	},

...(shouldCreateNewMoneyRequestReport && {lastVisibleActionCreated: reportPreviewAction?.created}),

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

We can create a test for buildOnyxDataForTrackExpense and test the optimistic data of the chat report when shouldCreateNewMoneyRequestReport is true and false.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021867328605330762929

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @shubham1206agra (External)

[melvin-bot]

@twisterdotcom, @shubham1206agra Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[twisterdotcom]

Still Help Wanted

[melvin-bot]

@twisterdotcom, @shubham1206agra Eep! 4 days overdue now. Issues have feelings too...

[twisterdotcom]

Same. Making weekly over the holidays.

[bernhardoj]

I already have a proposal above in case you missed it

[twisterdotcom]

Ah, @shubham1206agra let's get it reviewed!

[shubham1206agra]

Let's go with @bernhardoj's proposal.

🎀👀🎀 C+ Reviewed

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @srikarparsi, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.

[melvin-bot]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[melvin-bot]

@twisterdotcom @srikarparsi @shubham1206agra this issue was created 2 weeks ago. Are we close to approving a proposal? If not, what's blocking us from getting this issue assigned? Don't hesitate to create a thread in #expensify-open-source to align faster in real time. Thanks!

[melvin-bot]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[mvtglobally]

Issue not reproducible during KI retests. (First week)

[melvin-bot]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[melvin-bot]

This issue has not been updated in over 15 days. @twisterdotcom, @srikarparsi, @bernhardoj, @shubham1206agra eroding to Monthly issue.

P.S. Is everyone reading this sure this is really a near-term priority? Be brave: if you disagree, go ahead and close it out. If someone disagrees, they'll reopen it, and if they don't: one less thing to do!

[shubham1206agra]

Pending review from @srikarparsi

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

[melvin-bot]

Reviewing label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.0.95-6 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix chat doesn't scroll when splitting expense #54863

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2025-02-18. 🎊

For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:

• @bernhardoj requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @shubham1206agra requires payment automatic offer (Reviewer)

[melvin-bot]

@shubham1206agra @twisterdotcom @shubham1206agra The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed. Please copy/paste the BugZero Checklist from here into a new comment on this GH and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[twisterdotcom]

Payment Summary:

• @bernhardoj paid $250 via NewDot Manual Request
• @shubham1206agra paid $250 here (Reviewer)

[bernhardoj]

Requested in ND.

[JmillsExpensify]

$250 approved for @bernhardoj

[melvin-bot]

@twisterdotcom, @srikarparsi, @bernhardoj, @shubham1206agra Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[shubham1206agra]

BugZero Checklist:

• [Contributor] Classify the bug:

Bug classification

Source of bug:

• 1a. Result of the original design (eg. a case wasn't considered)
• 1b. Mistake during implementation
• 1c. Backend bug
• 1z. Other:

Where bug was reported:

• 2a. Reported on production (eg. bug slipped through the normal regression and PR testing process on staging)
• 2b. Reported on staging (eg. found during regression or PR testing)
• 2d. Reported on a PR
• 2z. Other:

Who reported the bug:

• 3a. Expensify user
• 3b. Expensify employee
• 3c. Contributor
• 3d. QA
• 3z. Other:

• [Contributor] The offending PR has been commented on, pointing out the bug it caused and why, so the author and reviewers can learn from the mistake.

  Link to comment: https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/36934/files#r1966458419

• [Contributor] If the regression was CRITICAL (e.g. interrupts a core flow) A discussion in #expensify-open-source has been started about whether any other steps should be taken (e.g. updating the PR review checklist) in order to catch this type of bug sooner.

  Link to discussion: Not Required

• [Contributor] If it was decided to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps using the template below to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.

• [BugZero Assignee] Create a GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon.

  Link to issue: https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/473689

Regression Test Proposal

Test:

1. Open a workspace chat with no unsettled expenses
2. Split bill on the workspace
3. Verify the chat is scrolled to the bottom

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[twisterdotcom]

Please accept the Upwork offer now @shubham1206agra.