[HOLD for payment 2024-01-11] Distance - Location search results in distance request editor are not location-biased

[kbecciv]

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: 1.4.21-1
Reproducible in staging?: y
Reproducible in production?: new feature
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail:
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:

Issue found when executing PR #33334

Action Performed:

1. Go to workspace chat > + > Request money > Distance.
2. Enter Start, Finish and Stop addresses.
3. Note that the search results show the locations close to the user location or the selected address.
4. Create the distance request.
5. Go to distance request page.
6. Click Distance.
7. Click any waypoint and enter any location.

Expected Result:

The search results are location-biased (it does not show location close to the selected address).

Actual Result:

The search results are not location-biased. It shows the results from the US.

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

Bug6331395_1704296437333.bandicam_2024-01-03_20-19-04-689.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @allroundexperts

[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.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @aldo-expensify (Engineering), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4319 for more details.

[paultsimura]

Proposal

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

When editing waypoints, the search results are not location-biased.

What is the root cause of that problem?

When creating a new request, we pass the locationBias parameter to the AddressSearch:

App/src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepWaypoint.js

Lines 284 to 309 in b8b675d

	<InputWrapperWithRef
	InputComponent={AddressSearch}
	locationBias={locationBias}
	canUseCurrentLocation
	inputID={`waypoint${pageIndex}`}
	ref={(e) => (textInput.current = e)}
	hint={!isOffline ? 'distance.errors.selectSuggestedAddress' : ''}
	containerStyles={[styles.mt4]}
	label={translate('distance.address')}
	defaultValue={waypointAddress}
	onPress={selectWaypoint}
	maxInputLength={CONST.FORM_CHARACTER_LIMIT}
	renamedInputKeys={{
	address: `waypoint${pageIndex}`,
	city: null,
	country: null,
	street: null,
	street2: null,
	zipCode: null,
	lat: null,
	lng: null,
	state: null,
	}}
	predefinedPlaces={recentWaypoints}
	resultTypes=""
	/>

But when editing, we do not:

App/src/pages/iou/WaypointEditor.js

Lines 222 to 246 in fd71747

	<InputWrapper
	InputComponent={AddressSearch}
	canUseCurrentLocation
	inputID={`waypoint${waypointIndex}`}
	ref={(e) => (textInput.current = e)}
	hint={!isOffline ? 'distance.errors.selectSuggestedAddress' : ''}
	containerStyles={[styles.mt3]}
	label={translate('distance.address')}
	defaultValue={waypointAddress}
	onPress={selectWaypoint}
	maxInputLength={CONST.FORM_CHARACTER_LIMIT}
	renamedInputKeys={{
	address: `waypoint${waypointIndex}`,
	city: null,
	country: null,
	street: null,
	street2: null,
	zipCode: null,
	lat: null,
	lng: null,
	state: null,
	}}
	predefinedPlaces={recentWaypoints}
	resultTypes=""
	/>

This was probably missed in the #33334 that added this new feature.

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

We should build and pass the locationBias on the WaypointEditor page as well.

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[aldo-expensify]

Thanks @paultsimura I think you are right, testing...

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

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

[aldo-expensify]

Adding bug zero to handle payments.

[aldo-expensify]

@allroundexperts reviewed the PR in the role of C+
@paultsimura gave a proposal which pointed exactly the cause of the bug and the PR was based on it

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

[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 1.4.21-4 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Move location bias calculation to hook and use it on edit #33887

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-01-11. 🎊

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

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

• @allroundexperts 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:

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

[sophiepintoraetz]

Looks like payments aren't due until the 11. @allroundexperts, can you complete the checklist, please?

[allroundexperts]

@sophiepintoraetz I think that a checklist is not needed here. The location bias was a new feature and this issue was more of a improvement to it rather than a bug. Also, at the time when this was created, the feature was not even deployed to production.

[sophiepintoraetz]

Okay, summarising payment for @allroundexperts for ND request: $500.

[paultsimura]

Hey @sophiepintoraetz, based on Aldo's comment #33877 (comment) and the Upwork contract you've sent me ("Payment for #33877"), will I be paid here as well, or you would close the contract?

[sophiepintoraetz]

@paultsimura - payment is issued through Upwork, as per the contributing guidelines, unless stated otherwise!

[sophiepintoraetz]

@paultsimura has been paid - @allroundexperts feel free to raise the ND request as per the summary here and, of course, the bug zero checklist!

[JmillsExpensify]

$500 to @allroundexperts based on this summary.