[HOLD for payment 2024-12-25] Don't show RBR on expense reports for violations

[puneetlath]

RBRs for violations should only show on workspace chats, not on individual expense reports or transaction threads.

Convo: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C05LX9D6E07/p1733854922551589

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @allroundexperts

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @trjExpensify (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.

[Shahidullah-Muffakir]

Proposal

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

Don't show RBR on expense reports for violations

What is the root cause of that problem?

we are not considering the type of report here:

App/src/components/LHNOptionsList/OptionRowLHN.tsx

Line 312 in e8212bd

{hasBrickError && (

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

We can add the condition optionItem.isPolicyExpenseChat there as:
{hasBrickError && !!optionItem.isPolicyExpenseChat && (

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

[puneetlath]

@s77rt is already working on this issue. That's why it's not marked External or Help Wanted.

[melvin-bot]

@puneetlath, @trjExpensify, @s77rt, @allroundexperts Eep! 4 days overdue now. Issues have feelings too...

[s77rt]

PR hit production 5 days ago.

[melvin-bot]

Payment Summary

Upwork Job

• Reviewer: @s77rt owed $250 via NewDot
• Reviewer: @allroundexperts owed $250 via NewDot

BugZero Checklist (@trjExpensify)

• 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//hired)
• I have paid out the Upwork contracts or cancelled the ones that are incorrect
• I have verified the payment summary above is correct

[melvin-bot]

@puneetlath, @trjExpensify, @s77rt, @allroundexperts Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[puneetlath]

@allroundexperts can you complete the checklist?

[melvin-bot]

@puneetlath, @trjExpensify, @s77rt, @allroundexperts Eep! 4 days overdue now. Issues have feelings too...

[trjExpensify]

Awaiting the checklist here. @allroundexperts can you get to that? Thanks!

[melvin-bot]

@puneetlath, @trjExpensify, @s77rt, @allroundexperts 12 days overdue now... This issue's end is nigh!

[s77rt]

Let me do the checklist

[s77rt]

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: Fix - LHN - RBR stays for paid report #52988 (comment)

• [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.

  Bug requires regression test: No, this bug occurred due a misunderstanding and I don't think it's worth a regression test

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

Precondition:

Test:

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[trjExpensify]

Nice one, thanks! Following the RCA, I see that parent issue had a regression test issue created for it, so I agree we don't need another: https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/451604

Payment summary as follows:

• $250 to @allroundexperts for the C+ review
• $250 to @s77rt for the fix

Both of you can go ahead and request, closing!

[allroundexperts]

Thanks for taking care of this @s77rt!

[JmillsExpensify]

$250 approved for @s77rt