Skip to content

[Due for payment 2026-01-07] [$250] Reports - "Reset Filters" is not displayed on filters page when "Group By" filter is applied #77879

Closed

Description

@jponikarchuk

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: 9.2.79-0
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: Yes
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from BrowserStack: https://test-management.browserstack.com/projects/2219752/test-runs/TR-2402/folder/13176922/41237509/1080011226
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): ibellicotest+2230@gmail.com
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Bug source: Regression TC Execution
Device used: Motorola MotoG60 / Android 12 / Chrome ( mWeb / Hybrid app) - Windows 11 / Chrome
App Component: Search

Action Performed:

Prerequisite: Account has at least one workspace.

  1. Open the staging.new.expensify.com website.
  2. Navigate to "Reports" > "Expenses"
  3. Tap on "Filters"
  4. Open any filter except "Group By" and apply any option.
  5. Note that after selected filter is saved, a "Reset Filters" option appears on the top right corner on filters page.
  6. Reset the applied filter.
  7. Tap on "Group By" and select any option.
  8. Tap on "Save"
  9. When landing on filters page, note that "Reset Filters" option is not displayed on the top right corner.

Expected Result:

When user applies any advanced filter, a "Reset Filters" option should be visible on the top right corner on filters page.

Actual Result:

When user applies the "Group By" advanced filter, "Reset Filters" option is not visible on the top right corner on filters page.
"Reset Filters" option is visible when any other advanced filter is applied.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

  • Android: App
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: App
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • iOS: mWeb Chrome
  • Windows: Chrome
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screenshots/Videos

1.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit
  • Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~022001420075452512496
  • Upwork Job ID: 2001420075452512496
  • Last Price Increase: 2025-12-17
  • Automatic offers:
    • etCoderDysto | Contributor | 109860860
Issue OwnerCurrent Issue Owner: @
Issue OwnerCurrent Issue Owner: @twisterdotcom

Activity

  1. added
    DeployBlockerCashThis issue or pull request should block deployment
    BugSomething is broken. Auto assigns a BugZero manager.
    on Dec 17, 2025
  2. melvin-bot commented on Dec 17, 2025

    @melvin-bot

    Triggered auto assignment to @twisterdotcom (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.

  3. melvin-bot commented on Dec 17, 2025

    @melvin-bot

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

  4. melvin-bot commented on Dec 17, 2025

    @melvin-bot

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

  5. github-actions commented on Dec 17, 2025

    @github-actions
    Contributor

    👋 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.
  6. etCoderDysto commented on Dec 17, 2025

    @etCoderDysto
    Contributor

    Proposal

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

    "Reset Filters" is not displayed on filters page when "Group By" filter is applied

    What is the root cause of that problem?

    1. We are returning false when key equals to groupBy when calculating shouldShowResetFilters
      if (key === CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_ROOT_KEYS.GROUP_BY) {
      return false;
      }
    2. When clicking reset filters, we are returning early if key === FILTER_KEYS.GROUP_BY and the button is not functional
      function clearAdvancedFilters() {
      const values: Partial<Nullable<SearchAdvancedFiltersForm>> = {};
      for (const key of Object.values(FILTER_KEYS)) {
      switch (key) {
      case FILTER_KEYS.GROUP_BY:
      continue;
      case FILTER_KEYS.COLUMNS:

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

    1. We should remove the if condition
     if (key === CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_ROOT_KEYS.GROUP_BY) {
                    return false;
                }
    

    if (key === CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_ROOT_KEYS.GROUP_BY) {
    return false;
    }

    2. We should remove the below condition for reset filter button to work

    case FILTER_KEYS.GROUP_BY:
                    continue;
    

    switch (key) {

    What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

    Reminder: Please use plain English, be brief and avoid jargon. Feel free to use images, charts or pseudo-code if necessary. Do not post large multi-line diffs or write walls of text. Do not create PRs unless you have been hired for this job.

  7. etCoderDysto commented on Dec 17, 2025

    @etCoderDysto
    Contributor

    This issue is reproducible on production too.

  8. melvin-bot commented on Dec 17, 2025

    @melvin-bot

    📣 @etCoderDysto! 📣
    Hey, it seems we don’t have your contributor details yet! You'll only have to do this once, and this is how we'll hire you on Upwork.
    Please follow these steps:

    1. Make sure you've read and understood the contributing guidelines.
    2. Get the email address used to login to your Expensify account. If you don't already have an Expensify account, create one here. If you have multiple accounts (e.g. one for testing), please use your main account email.
    3. Get the link to your Upwork profile. It's necessary because we only pay via Upwork. You can access it by logging in, and then clicking on your name. It'll look like this. If you don't already have an account, sign up for one here.
    4. Copy the format below and paste it in a comment on this issue. Replace the placeholder text with your actual details.
      Screen Shot 2022-11-16 at 4 42 54 PM
      Format:
    Contributor details
    Your Expensify account email: <REPLACE EMAIL HERE>
    Upwork Profile Link: <REPLACE LINK HERE>
    
  9. 28 remaining items

  10. melvin-bot commented on Dec 31, 2025

    @melvin-bot

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

  11. melvin-bot commented on Dec 31, 2025

    @melvin-bot

    The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.2.89-6 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

    If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2026-01-07. 🎊

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

  12. melvin-bot commented on Dec 31, 2025

    @melvin-bot

    @bernhardoj @twisterdotcom The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed. Please copy/paste the BugZero Checklist from here into a new comment on this GH and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

  13. bernhardoj commented on Jan 1, 2026

    @bernhardoj
    Contributor

    BugZero Checklist:

    • [Contributor] 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: N/A - It was a design choice to not show the Reset filters when the group by only has 1 option

    • [Contributor] If the regression was CRITICAL (e.g. interrupts a core flow) A discussion in #expensify-open-source 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: N/A

    • [Contributor] If it was decided to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps using the template below to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.

    No need to create another test because it was caught on an existing test.

    Regression Test Proposal Template
    • [BugZero Assignee] Create a GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon.

      Link to issue:

    Regression Test Proposal

    Precondition:

    Test:

    Do we agree 👍 or 👎

  14. twisterdotcom commented on Jan 6, 2026

    @twisterdotcom
    Contributor

    This isn't overdue. Payment is due tomorrow.

  15. twisterdotcom commented on Jan 9, 2026

    @twisterdotcom
    Contributor

    Payment Summary:

  16. bernhardoj commented on Jan 10, 2026

    @bernhardoj
    Contributor

    Requested in ND.

  17. garrettmknight commented on Jan 31, 2026

    @garrettmknight
    Contributor

    $250 approved for @bernhardoj

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Labels

Awaiting PaymentAuto-added when associated PR is deployed to productionBugSomething is broken. Auto assigns a BugZero manager.DailyKSv2EngineeringExternalAdded to denote the issue can be worked on by a contributor

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions