[HOLD for payment 2024-08-01] [$250] Expense report - System message "randomly selected for review" displayed with markdown

[izarutskaya]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 9.0.5-5
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: N
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: https://expensify.testrail.io/index.php?/tests/view/4703834
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Issue reported by: Applause-internal team

Action Performed:

Rrecondition: user A is set as admin-approver and user B is a member of a workspace, as a workspace admin set Randomly route reports for manual approval in OD to 50%. Also in Reports tab "How often expenses submit :' choose "Weekly"

1. [user B] On secondary device submit 2 expense reports with the same expenses to trigger manual review system message
2. [user A] Open the app and log in
3. [user A] Navigate to the workspace chat
4. [user A] Open the first submitted report with the same expense

Expected Result:

The system message "This report was randomly selected for manual review" is displayed without markdown

Actual Result:

The system message is displayed with the markdown

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

• Android: Native
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Native
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Bug6536597_1720506318486.IMG_8051.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01642f4710fbdb092e
• Upwork Job ID: 1811525296681690453
• Last Price Increase: 2024-07-18

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @stephanieelliott

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @stephanieelliott (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 @nkuoch (DeployBlockerCash), see https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/9980/ for more details.

[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.

[izarutskaya]

@stephanieelliott 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.

[izarutskaya]

We think this issue might be related to the #collect project.

[izarutskaya]

Production

Recording.586.mp4

[danieldoglas]

Removing DeployBlocker from the backend since I don't think this is a backend issue

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @nkuoch is eligible for the DeployBlockerCash assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[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.

[Julesssss]

Damn. On second thoughts I think this should be a blocker 😭

[Julesssss]

After discussing here we are treating this as a non-blocker.

[bernhardoj]

PR is ready

cc: @Pujan92

[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 9.0.11-5 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix randomly selected for review system message shown as html/markdown #45819

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-08-01. 🎊

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

• @Pujan92 requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @bernhardoj requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests

[melvin-bot]

BugZero Checklist: The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed:

• [@Pujan92] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@Pujan92] 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:
• [@Pujan92] A discussion in #expensify-bugs 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:
• [@Pujan92] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@Pujan92] If we decide to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.
• [@stephanieelliott] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[melvin-bot]

Payment Summary

Upwork Job

• Reviewer: @Pujan92 owed $250 via NewDot
• Reviewer: @bernhardoj owed $250 via NewDot

BugZero Checklist (@stephanieelliott)

• I have verified the correct assignees and roles are listed above and updated the neccesary manual offers
• I have verified that there are no duplicate or incorrect contracts on Upwork for this job (https://www.upwork.com/ab/applicants/1811525296681690453/hired)
• I have paid out the Upwork contracts or cancelled the ones that are incorrect
• I have verified the payment summary above is correct

[bernhardoj]

Requested in ND.

[stephanieelliott]

Summarizing payment on this issue:

• Contributor: @Pujan92 $250, please request via NewDot
• Contributor+: @bernhardoj $250, please request via NewDot

[JmillsExpensify]

$250 approved for @Pujan92

[JmillsExpensify]

$250 approved for @bernhardoj

[melvin-bot]

@nkuoch, @Pujan92, @stephanieelliott, @bernhardoj Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[stephanieelliott]

Hey @Pujan92 this is just waiting for you to complete the BZ checklist!

[stephanieelliott]

Bump here @Pujan92, can you please complete the BZ checklist?

[Pujan92]

BugZero Checklist: The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed:

• [@Pujan92] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: [ESM] Localize system messages #43079
• [@Pujan92] 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/43079/files#r1709608143
• [@Pujan92] A discussion in #expensify-bugs 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
• [@Pujan92] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug. - Yes
• [@Pujan92] If we decide to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.

Regression Test Steps

1. [user A] Invite user B to the workspace
2. [user B] Submit two expenses in that workspace with the similar details to trigger a manual review system message
3. [user A] Navigate to the workspace chat
4. [user A] Open the submitted report
5. [user A] Verify the "randomly selected for review" message isn't rendered in markdown form

[melvin-bot]

@nkuoch, @Pujan92, @stephanieelliott, @bernhardoj Huh... This is 4 days overdue. Who can take care of this?

[stephanieelliott]

Issue created for new test case: https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/420217

All done here, thanks!