[HOLD for payment 2023-04-10][Workspace Chats] Name of the workspace does not appear as the preview row in the search results for the admin

[trjExpensify]

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

---

Action Performed:

prerequisite: you must be using an account that's on the policyExpenseChat beta

1. Go to new.expensify.com
2. Click the green + icon FAB > New workspace
3. Navigate to the Manager members tab of the workspace settings
4. Click Invite and enter a valid email address to invite a new member to the workspace
5. CMD+K to bring up the search/chat switcher page

Expected Result:

As an admin, the workspace chat in the search results should have the primaryLogin (or fullName) as the first row, and the name of the workspace as the second row. I.e

tom@trj.chat
Mills' Mills workspace 

Actual Result:

The workspace chat in the search results displays an empty preview from the member as the second row on creation. I.e

tom@trj.chat
tom@trj.chat: 

Workaround:

N/A beta feature

Platforms:

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

• Android / native
• Android / Chrome
• iOS / native
• iOS / Safari
• MacOS / Chrome / Safari
• MacOS / Desktop

Version Number: v1.2.87-1
Reproducible in staging?:
Reproducible in production?: Y
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail:
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): tom+wcrun20@trj.chat
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Notes/Photos/Videos: Any additional supporting documentation

(excuse the old mock)

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @trjExpensify
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C02HWMSMZEC/p1679607461290709?thread_ts=1679329747.036069&cid=C02HWMSMZEC

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~018cb101c0281722e5
• Upwork Job ID: 1639025649633243136
• Last Price Increase: 2023-03-28

[MelvinBot]

Current assignee @trjExpensify is eligible for the Bug assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[MelvinBot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~018cb101c0281722e5

[MelvinBot]

Bug0 Triage Checklist (Main S/O)

• This "bug" occurs on a supported platform (ensure Platforms in OP are ✅)
• This bug is not a duplicate report (check E/App issues and #expensify-bugs)
  • If it is, comment with a link to the original report, close the issue and add any novel details to the original issue instead
• This bug is reproducible using the reproduction steps in the OP. S/O
  • If the reproduction steps are clear and you're unable to reproduce the bug, check with the reporter and QA first, then close the issue.
  • If the reproduction steps aren't clear and you determine the correct steps, please update the OP.
• This issue is filled out as thoroughly and clearly as possible
  • Pay special attention to the title, results, platforms where the bug occurs, and if the bug happens on staging/production.
• I have reviewed and subscribed to the linked Slack conversation to ensure Slack/Github stay in sync

[MelvinBot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor Plus for review of internal employee PR - @0xmiroslav (Internal)

[BeeMargarida]

Hi, Ana from Callstack, I can work on this issue

[BeeMargarida]

Proposal

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

When searching for chats using Cmd+K, the preview of the Policy expense chats does not show the name of the workspace. The expected behaviour would be to show the name of the workspace for the admin and the last message for the member.

What is the root cause of that problem?

Currently there is no check to see if the user is the admin of the policy expense chat when building the chat preview for the search sidebar.

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

The logic regarding the preview building for the search is in OptionsListUtils.js. Each report is iterated and the function createOption is called here with the prop forcePolicyNamePreview that controls if the chat preview shows the name of the policy workspace or the last message (if possible).

I suggest changing this part of the code to something like

const isOwner = ReportUtils.isPolicyExpenseChatAdmin(report, policies);

allReportOptions.push(createOption(logins, personalDetails, report, reportActions, {
    showChatPreviewLine,
    forcePolicyNamePreview: isPolicyExpenseChat ? isSearchingSomeonesPolicyExpenseChat || isOwner : forcePolicyNamePreview,
}));

The isPolicyExpenseChatAdmin is a new function that verifies if the current user is the admin of the policy and would be something like:

function isPolicyExpenseChatAdmin(report, policies) {
  if (!isPolicyExpenseChat(report)) {
      return false;
  }

  const policy = policies[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.POLICY}${report.policyID}`];
  if (!policy) {
      return false;
  }

  return policy ? policy.owner === currentUserEmail : false;
}

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

[mountiny]

policy.owner === currentUserEmail I am not sure if this condition is the best, at the moment you cannot invite more admins to the workspace in EChat, but you will be able to do this soon.

I think there is a role property for the policy, there is this method which checks if user is an admin for some policy

App/src/libs/actions/Policy.js

Lines 143 to 153 in 1de4021

	* Is the user an admin of a free policy (aka workspace)?
	*
	* @param {Array} policies
	* @returns {Boolean}
	*/
	function isAdminOfFreePolicy(policies) {
	return _.some(policies, policy => policy
	&& policy.type === CONST.POLICY.TYPE.FREE
	&& policy.role === CONST.POLICY.ROLE.ADMIN);
	}

but we could check for a role in this specific poliicy I think

[BeeMargarida]

policy.owner === currentUserEmail I am not sure if this condition is the best, at the moment you cannot invite more admins to the workspace in EChat, but you will be able to do this soon.

Ah, got it, makes sense

but we could check for a role in this specific policy I think

Ah, so does the role value adapt to the user? Didn't know that. So changing to the code below should work:

function isPolicyExpenseChatAdmin(report, policies) {
    if (!isPolicyExpenseChat(report)) {
        return false;
    }

    const policy = policies[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.POLICY}${report.policyID}`];
    if (!policy) {
        return false;
    }

    return policy.role === CONST.POLICY.ROLE.ADMIN;
}

I also noticed that the same error is happening to the LHN in the sidebar. This same logic could be applied there

[mountiny]

@BeeMargarida Great, lets make a PR! Thank you!

[MelvinBot]

Current assignee @trjExpensify is eligible for the External assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[mountiny]

This is actually external so making it so

[MelvinBot]

Current assignee @0xmiroslav is eligible for the External assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[MelvinBot]

Current assignee @mountiny is eligible for the External assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[dangrous]

oh hai just wanted to pop in here - will this be affected by #16483 which we're working on now?

[mountiny]

Seems like we should be good, but would be great to probably merge yours and then merge main to our PR and confirm all works fine.

[BeeMargarida]

Updated, merged main with the PR

[mountiny]

Thanks, reviewed, just pending testing and review from C+

[MelvinBot]

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

[MelvinBot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.2.92-2 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: show workspace name in search preview for policy expense chats #16554

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-04-07. 🎊

After the hold period is over and BZ checklist items are completed, please complete any of the applicable payments for this issue, and check them off once done.

• External issue reporter
• Contributor that fixed the issue
• Contributor+ that helped on the issue and/or PR

As a reminder, here are the bonuses/penalties that should be applied for any External issue:

• Merged PR within 3 business days of assignment - 50% bonus
• Merged PR more than 9 business days after assignment - 50% penalty

[MelvinBot]

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:

• [@0xmiroslav / @mountiny] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@0xmiroslav / @mountiny] 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:
• [@0xmiroslav / @mountiny] 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:
• [@trjExpensify] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@0xmiroslav] 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.
• [@trjExpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[MelvinBot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.2.93-4 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: show workspace name in search preview for policy expense chats #16554

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-04-10. 🎊

After the hold period is over and BZ checklist items are completed, please complete any of the applicable payments for this issue, and check them off once done.

• External issue reporter
• Contributor that fixed the issue
• Contributor+ that helped on the issue and/or PR

As a reminder, here are the bonuses/penalties that should be applied for any External issue:

• Merged PR within 3 business days of assignment - 50% bonus
• Merged PR more than 9 business days after assignment - 50% penalty

[MelvinBot]

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:

• [@0xmiroslav / @mountiny] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@0xmiroslav / @mountiny] 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:
• [@0xmiroslav / @mountiny] 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:
• [@trjExpensify] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@0xmiroslav] 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.
• [@trjExpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[MelvinBot]

@trjExpensify, @BeeMargarida, @mountiny, @0xmiroslav Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[MelvinBot]

@trjExpensify, @BeeMargarida, @mountiny, @0xmiroslav Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

[trjExpensify]

👋 Melv, I'm back from OoO today. @0xmiroslav, I've sent you a contract for the C+ review.

[@0xmiroslav / @mountiny] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
[@0xmiroslav / @mountiny] 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:

@BeeMargarida fixed the regression and was the author of #15895 which introduced it, so no action needed here! 😄 Checked them off.

As for these:

[@0xmiroslav / @mountiny] 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:
[@trjExpensify] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
[@0xmiroslav] 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.
[@trjExpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

We're in the process of adding the overarching workspace chats regression test suite, and this is covered in them, so no specific action is needed to add anything else. Checked them off!

[trjExpensify]

Settled up!