Skip to content

Reports - "Multiple attendees required for this category" does not appear on expense row #78040

Closed

Description

@vincdargento

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: 9.2.82-0
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: N/A - new feature, doesn't exist in prod
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from BrowserStack: #76687
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): odjsodijsdoinjsdoi@gmail.com
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Bug source: Pull Request QA execution
Device used: Mac 26.1 / Chrome
App Component: Search

Action Performed:

Precondition:

  • Rules are enabled.
  • Enable Attendee tracking in Rules.

1.Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Go to workspace chat.
3. Create two expenses with Advertising category.
4. Go to workspace settings > Categories.
5. Open Advertising settings.
6. Click Require fields.
7. Enable Require attendees.
8. Go back to workspace chat.
9. Open expense report.
→ "Multiple attendees required for this category" violation is shown on the expense row.
10. Go to Reports > Expenses.

Expected Result:

"Multiple attendees required for this category" will appear on expense row on Reports.

Actual Result:

"Multiple attendees required for this category" does not appear on expense row on Reports.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

Screenshots/Videos

bug.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Activity

  1. added
    DeployBlockerCashThis issue or pull request should block deployment
    BugSomething is broken. Auto assigns a BugZero manager.
    on Dec 18, 2025
  2. melvin-bot commented on Dec 18, 2025

    @melvin-bot

    Triggered auto assignment to @mallenexpensify (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 18, 2025

    @melvin-bot

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

  4. melvin-bot commented on Dec 18, 2025

    @melvin-bot

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

  5. github-actions commented on Dec 18, 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. ikevin127 commented on Dec 18, 2025

    @ikevin127
    Contributor

    This comes from #76687, but I'm not sure whether BE actually returns that data in Reports - Expenses fetch, I have to check and confirm - I wouldn't block deploy on this though.

  7. cead22 commented on Dec 19, 2025

    @cead22
    Contributor

    I agree we don't need to block on this.

    @ikevin127 since the violations showed on the report page, the transaction violation data should be in onyx. Since the violations aren't being shown on the Reports - Expenses page, I'm guessing it's due to the front end not displaying them

  8. 1 remaining item

  9. removed
    DeployBlockerCashThis issue or pull request should block deployment
    on Dec 19, 2025
  10. ikevin127 commented on Dec 19, 2025

    @ikevin127
    Contributor

    Sure, I'll be checking on this tomorrow!

    PR was reverted in the meantime due to another blocker - will keep this one in mind when reopening follow-up.

  11. melvin-bot commented on Dec 23, 2025

    @melvin-bot

    @lakchote, @mallenexpensify Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

  12. mallenexpensify commented on Dec 24, 2025

    @mallenexpensify
    Contributor

    @ikevin127 want to be assigned here?

  13. ikevin127 commented on Dec 24, 2025

    @ikevin127
    Contributor

    @mallenexpensify No need for assignment since PR causing this issue was reverted - this issue can be closed 👍 I noted down the issue for the rework PR ✅

  14. ikevin127 commented on Dec 25, 2025

    @ikevin127
    Contributor

    🟢 Fix applied in rework PR commit 81411ff. This issue can be closed as test was added to PR description 👍

  15. mallenexpensify commented on Dec 29, 2025

    @mallenexpensify
    Contributor

    Closing per @ikevin127 's comments above

  16. added
    ReviewingHas a PR in review
    and removed on Jan 8, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Labels

BugSomething is broken. Auto assigns a BugZero manager.EngineeringReviewingHas a PR in reviewWeeklyKSv2

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions