[Due for payment 2025-02-18] [$250] Refactor trackExpense to use a parameter object

[neil-marcellini]

As part of the tracking issue, and as advised in its description, refactor trackExpense to use a parameter object.

cc @mkzie2

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021879239009729788708
• Upwork Job ID: 1879239009729788708
• Last Price Increase: 2025-01-14
• Automatic offers:
• mkzie2 | Contributor | 105714544

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @michaelkwardrop

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021879239009729788708

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @michaelkwardrop (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.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @abdulrahuman5196 (External)

[mkzie2]

Proposal

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

Refactor trackExpense to use a parameter object

What is the root cause of that problem?

This is an improvement

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

Wrap all parameters of this function into one object and in this object, we can have some sub-objects that will wrap the related data.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Line 4157 in 6ed0fdd

function trackExpense(

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

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[mkzie2]

@neil-marcellini I'm here.

[github-actions]

⚠️ Thanks for your proposal. Please update it to follow the proposal template, as proposals are only reviewed if they follow that format.

[mkzie2]

@abdulrahuman5196 The PR is ready.

[mkzie2]

@neil-marcellini Please assign me here.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @mkzie2 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job
Please accept the offer and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[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:

• Refactor TrackExpense function #55261

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

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

• @abdulrahuman5196 requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @dukenv0307 requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @mkzie2 requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)

[melvin-bot]

@abdulrahuman5196 / @dukenv0307 @michaelkwardrop @abdulrahuman5196 / @dukenv0307 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]

[melvin-bot]

@neil-marcellini @abdulrahuman5196 @dukenv0307 @mkzie2 @michaelkwardrop this issue is now 4 weeks old, please consider:

• Finding a contributor to fix the bug
• Closing the issue if BZ has been unable to add the issue to a VIP or Wave project
• If you have any questions, don't hesitate to start a discussion in #expensify-open-source

Thanks!

[dukenv0307]

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: Refactor issue

Where bug was reported:

• 2a. Reported on production
• 2b. Reported on staging (deploy blocker)
• 2c. 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: This is refactor issue so no need for offending PR

• [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: N/A

• [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. Yes

Regression Test Proposal Template

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

  Link to issue:

Regression Test Proposal

Test:

1. Login in an account that has the selfDM
2. Create a track expense
3. Verify that the track expense is created successfully with the correct data

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[michaelkwardrop]

Tomorrow is payday!

[michaelkwardrop]

Regression Test GH here: https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/472041

[michaelkwardrop]

Payment Summary

Contributor: @mkzie2 paid $250 via Upwork ✅

Contributor+: @dukenv0307 due $250 via NewDot

Removed abdulrahuman5196 because they were not involved on this issue. Let me know if I missed something @neil-marcellini!

[michaelkwardrop]

[JmillsExpensify]

$250 approved for @dukenv0307