Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

PR56093-Chat-Group chat header instead of chat 1:1 header after exchanging expenses offline #56511

Open
1 of 8 tasks
mitarachim opened this issue Feb 7, 2025 · 5 comments
Open
1 of 8 tasks
Assignees
Labels
Bug Something is broken. Auto assigns a BugZero manager. DeployBlocker Indicates it should block deploying the API DeployBlockerCash This issue or pull request should block deployment Engineering Hourly KSv2

Comments

@mitarachim
Copy link

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: 9.0.95-0
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: #56093
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): [email protected]
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Device used: Samsung S23FE/ Android 14
App Component: Other

Action Performed:

Precondition: User A and User B have never chatted before.

  1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
  2. [User A] Go offline.
  3. [User A] Submit an expense to User B
  4. [User B logged in to another platform] While online, submit an expense to User A
  5. [User A] Stay on chat with User B and go online.

Expected Result:

The app will auto-refresh and show the chat with User B and User A.

Actual Result:

The app auto-refreshes and shows a group chat with 3 users: User A, User B, and User without avatar. The behavior of the header matches with a group chat behavior instead of a chat 1:1.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

Screenshots/Videos

Bug6735830_1738898207709.Group_chat_header.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

@mitarachim mitarachim added Bug Something is broken. Auto assigns a BugZero manager. Daily KSv2 DeployBlocker Indicates it should block deploying the API DeployBlockerCash This issue or pull request should block deployment labels Feb 7, 2025
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 7, 2025

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.

Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 7, 2025

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

Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 7, 2025

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

@github-actions github-actions bot added Engineering Hourly KSv2 and removed Daily KSv2 labels Feb 7, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Feb 7, 2025

👋 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.

@mitarachim
Copy link
Author

issue not reproduce while Use Staging Server is ON

2025-02-07.11.12.55.AM.1.mp4

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Bug Something is broken. Auto assigns a BugZero manager. DeployBlocker Indicates it should block deploying the API DeployBlockerCash This issue or pull request should block deployment Engineering Hourly KSv2
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants