[HOLD for payment 2024-02-26] [$500] On Onfido setup, the numbers at the top can be clicked

[kavimuru]

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: 1.4.41-2
Reproducible in staging?: y
Reproducible in production?: n (New flow)
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:

Action Performed:

1. Go to workspace settings
2. Start adding bank account manually
3. Proceed upto onfido page
4. Click on the circles at the top

Expected Result:

Should not be able to click

Actual Result:

Able to click and change status

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

20240214_053031.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~017f9176469aeb0a7d
• Upwork Job ID: 1757552549986205696
• Last Price Increase: 2024-02-13
• Automatic offers:
• Ollyws | Reviewer | 0
• akinwale | Contributor | 0

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~017f9176469aeb0a7d

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

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

[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 @marcaaron (Engineering), see https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/9980/ for more details.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @Ollyws 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Reviewer role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job

[melvin-bot]

📣 @akinwale 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job
Please accept the offer and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[marcaaron]

Seems related to #34498

I'm going to assign people who approved the PR and the author since they probably have more context than me and the changes look extensive.

[marcaaron]

cc @barttom @shubham1206agra

[abzokhattab]

Proposal

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

On Onfido setup, the numbers at the top can be clicked

What is the root cause of that problem?

the steps are only disabled if the currentStep is smaller than the target step index

App/src/components/InteractiveStepSubHeader.tsx

Line 58 in c03a1a2

const isLockedStep = currentStep < index;

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

we need to add another prop disablePreviousStep and update the isLockedStep to

                const isLockedStep = currentStep < index || props.disablePreviousSteps;

then inside the onfido step, we need to enable the disablePreviousSteps prop

App/src/pages/ReimbursementAccount/VerifyIdentity/VerifyIdentity.tsx

Lines 68 to 72 in a95392a

	<InteractiveStepSubHeader
	onStepSelected={() => {}}
	startStepIndex={2}
	stepNames={CONST.BANK_ACCOUNT.STEP_NAMES}
	/>

also we need to enabled it in the upcoming steps as well

[MrMuzyk]

Proposal

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

Steps displayed by InteractiveStepSubHeader component are clickable on Onfido step

What is the root cause of that problem?

Empty method is passed via onStepSelected prop inside VerifyIdentity screen

App/src/pages/ReimbursementAccount/VerifyIdentity/VerifyIdentity.tsx

Lines 67 to 73 in 00fc955

	<View style={[styles.ph5, styles.mt3, {height: CONST.BANK_ACCOUNT.STEPS_HEADER_HEIGHT}]}>
	<InteractiveStepSubHeader
	onStepSelected={() => {}}
	startStepIndex={2}
	stepNames={CONST.BANK_ACCOUNT.STEP_NAMES}
	/>
	</View>

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

Remove onStepSelected prop completely in the place linked above and add another check inside InteractiveStepSubHeader
disabled={isLockedStep || !onStepSelected}

This way step will be disabled completely (not even clickable) if we do not plan on navigating to it anyway

[MrMuzyk]

I am Michał from Callstack - expert contributor group. I’d like to work on this job.

[mountiny]

Assigned @MrMuzyk to this issue as author of the PR

[abzokhattab]

@mountiny Hi Vit, please correct me if i am wrong, as far as I understand in case the issue is labeled as "Help Wanted", the issue should be assigned to the first correct proposal, right? why this is not the case in this issue?

[mountiny]

@abzokhattab Hi! Sorry for the confusion. This was a deploy blocker issue automatically labelled with External and Help Wanted labels. By contributing guidelines, if there is a regression found from your PR, the author is the one who should fix it. In this case its @MrMuzyk and other callstack devs who worked on this big feature.

We ca however, offer partial reward to contributor who offered solution that was used in the fix.

[mountiny]

It seems like @MrMuzyk used different solution than you have proposed though so I would say no partial reward this time.

We appreciate your help and surely it will work out better next time. With Deploy blocker there is always a risk that you wont be the one picked since the PR author is more easily identifiable (but the fix is also more easily identifiable)

[abzokhattab]

okay thank you so much for the clarification

[mountiny]

PR was CPed this is resolved

[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 1.4.42-5 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• [CP Staging] fix: followup fixes for vbba refactor #36472

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-02-26. 🎊

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

• @akinwale requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)
• @Ollyws requires payment automatic offer (Reviewer)
• @MrMuzyk does not require payment (Contractor)

[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:

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