[ON HOLD] [$500] Split - Error above split button disappears when merchant is not entered

[lanitochka17]

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: 1.3.45-5
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: Y
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: https://expensify.testrail.io/index.php?/tests/view/4264387
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers):
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team
Slack conversation:

Action Performed:

1, Go to workspace chat
2. Click + > Split bill
3. Create a bill split with an invalid receipt
4. When the scanning fails, click on the split preview
5. Click Amount
6. Enter amount and save

Expected Result:

The error above split button will remain as not all the required fields (Merchant) are entered

Actual Result:

The error above split button disappears when merchant is not entered

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

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6364785_1706877386715.20240202_124142.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01e2368e0550fbbb4b
• Upwork Job ID: 1753420140902309888
• Last Price Increase: 2024-02-23

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01e2368e0550fbbb4b

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @alexpensify (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details.

[lanitochka17]

We think that this bug might be related to #vip-split-p2p-chat-groups

[bernhardoj]

Proposal

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

The required fields error disappears after we update the amount of a failed split bill.

What is the root cause of that problem?

One of the condition for the error to show is the transaction missing required fields data.

App/src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList.js

Line 282 in 8f58898

return (props.hasSmartScanFailed && TransactionUtils.hasMissingSmartscanFields(transaction)) || (didConfirmSplit && TransactionUtils.areRequiredFieldsEmpty(transaction));

App/src/libs/TransactionUtils.ts

Lines 167 to 169 in 8f58898

	const parentReport = allReports?.[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${transaction?.reportID}`] ?? null;
	const isFromExpenseReport = parentReport?.type === CONST.REPORT.TYPE.EXPENSE;
	return (isFromExpenseReport && isMerchantMissing(transaction)) || isAmountMissing(transaction) || isCreatedMissing(transaction);

The merchant is only required if it's an expense request and it should be true for our case. It checks the report from the transaction reportID, but in the split case, the report ID is a constant of -2.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.js

Lines 1418 to 1421 in 8f58898

	const splitTransaction = TransactionUtils.buildOptimisticTransaction(
	amount,
	currency,
	CONST.REPORT.SPLIT_REPORTID,

This is because a split request doesn't have an IOU report (I guess).

So, the expense request check is always false, and updating the amount is enough to remove the required fields error message.

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

Instead of relying on the transaction report ID, we can pass the value from the params.

areRequiredFieldsEmpty(transaction, isFromExpenseReport)

App/src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList.js

Line 282 in 8f58898

return (props.hasSmartScanFailed && TransactionUtils.hasMissingSmartscanFields(transaction)) || (didConfirmSplit && TransactionUtils.areRequiredFieldsEmpty(transaction));

and we can pass props.isPolicyExpenseChat as the value.

or we can keep the parent report type check and the new param, so we will rely on 2 values
else, we can pass anything optional like report ID that can be used to detect whether it's an expense report or not

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

We can set the report ID to the split transaction, but I guess we need to do it on BE too which might not be the best solution.

[alexpensify]

@abdulrahuman5196 when you get a chance, let us know if this proposal will fix this issue. Thanks!

[abdulrahuman5196]

Will work on review today