[ON HOLD for Payment 2/24/25] [$250] Per diem - Quantity field shows error after selecting a subrate

[vincdargento]

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: 9.0.87-0
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: No
If this was caught on HybridApp, is this reproducible on New Expensify Standalone?: N/A
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: N/A
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): applausetester+29302392@applause.expensifail.com
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Device used: Mac 15.0 / Chrome
App Component: Money Requests

Action Performed:

Precondition:

• Workspace has per diem rates.

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Go to workspace chat.
3. Click + > Submit expense > Per diem.
4. Select destination > Next.
5. Select time > Next.
6. Click Subrate.
7. Select a subrate.

Expected Result:

Quantity field will not show error after selecting a subrate (production behavior).

Actual Result:

Quantity field shows error after selecting a subrate.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

Screenshots/Videos

bug.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021883939320560472623
• Upwork Job ID: 1883939320560472623
• Last Price Increase: 2025-01-27
• Automatic offers:
• FitseTLT | Contributor | 105977085

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @mananjadhav

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @CortneyOfstad (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 @youssef-lr (DeployBlockerCash), see https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/9980/ for more details.

[melvin-bot]

💬 A slack conversation has been started in #expensify-open-source

[github-actions]

👋 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.

[vincdargento]

@CortneyOfstad FYI I haven't added the External label as I wasn't 100% sure about this issue. Please take a look and add the label if you agree it's a bug and can be handled by external contributors.

[neil-marcellini]

NAB, per diem is behind a beta

[shubham1206agra]

@youssef-lr You can take this external.

[melvin-bot]

@youssef-lr, @CortneyOfstad Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

[CortneyOfstad]

@youssef-lr any update? Thanks!

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021883939320560472623

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

@mananjadhav @youssef-lr @CortneyOfstad 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!

[mananjadhav]

@youssef-lr @CortneyOfstad Can you confirm if the desired behavior is correct? The proposal mentions the behavior is expected.

@FitseTLT While I haven't tested the issue, can you confirm why is it not reproducible on production, but is on staging?

[FitseTLT]

@FitseTLT While I haven't tested the issue, can you confirm why is it not reproducible on production, but is on staging?

@mananjadhav This is because validation on change was only enabled in #54760

App/src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepSubrate.tsx

Line 218 in 4459f86

shouldValidateOnChange

[mananjadhav]

@FitseTLT's proposal makes sense, subject to verifying the expected behavior.

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed.

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @youssef-lr is eligible for the choreEngineerContributorManagement assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[shubham1206agra]

@Gonals Can you please check the proposal too here just to cover all bases here?

[melvin-bot]

📣 @FitseTLT 🎉 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 📖

[mananjadhav]

The issue was just assigned yesterday. PR will be up soon.

@FitseTLT any ETA on the PR?

[CortneyOfstad]

PR is being actively worked on 👍

[mananjadhav]

Waiting for a review from @youssef-lr

[mananjadhav]

@CortneyOfstad The PR was deployed to production yesterday but the payout date isn't updated.

[CortneyOfstad]

@mananjadhav I sent you an offer to the job here — can you let me know once you accept?

Also, can you confirm if a regression test is needed?

[mananjadhav]

@CortneyOfstad I'll be raising the request on NewDot. I've declined the offer on Upwork. Posting the checklist in the next comment.

[mananjadhav]

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: NA

• [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: NA

• [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:

Regression Test Proposal

Precondition:

• Beta is enabled Workspace has per diem rates.

Test:

1. Go to workspace chat.
2. Click + Submit expense Per diem.
3. Select destination Next.
4. Select time Next.
5. Click Subrate.
6. Select a subrate.
7. Verify Quantity field is focused and will not show error after selecting a substrate.
8. Enter a quantity value and tap outside of the text input to remove the focus
9. Refocus on the text input by clicking it and delete the value you entered so that the text input will be empty
10. Verify that field is required error appears

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[CortneyOfstad]

Payment Summary

@FitseTLT — paid $250 via Upwork
@mananjadhav — to be paid $250 via NewDot

Regression Test

https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/473909

[garrettmknight]

$250 approved for @mananjadhav