App: [HOLD for payment 2024-02-07] [$500] [WAVE 5] When inserting a manual request into the database, it should store the full YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS in the created field.

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: Reproducible in staging?: needs reproduction Reproducible in production?: needs reproduction 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: @quinthar Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1703974640800789

Action Performed:

  1. Create a expense report
  2. Check the database for the created field

Expected Result:

Should show full YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS in the created field

Actual Result:

Only date is shown

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

Snip - (8) New Expensify - Google Chrome

Add any screenshot/video evidence

created = 2023-12-30
   transactionID = 2319307528311357589
          cardID = 1
        reportID = 6366900578615993
       receiptID = 
          amount = -100
        merchant = none
             mcc = 
           state = -3
         comment = {"comment":"testing,  ignore"}
             tag = People
      externalID = 
            memo = 
        inserted = 2023-12-30 22:15:22
        currency = USD
 modifiedCreated = 
  modifiedAmount = 
modifiedMerchant = 
     modifiedMCC = 
        category = 
 transactionHash = hash02D2CC34EBAE91FA6402C266E22C3351F19B2A2D
modifiedCurrency =

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit
  • Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~013d6c2c0634442800
  • Upwork Job ID: 1742312917478391808
  • Last Price Increase: 2024-01-09
  • Automatic offers:
    • cubuspl42 | Reviewer | 28106623
    • dukenv0307 | Contributor | 28106624

About this issue

  • Original URL
  • State: closed
  • Created 6 months ago
  • Comments: 37 (23 by maintainers)

Most upvoted comments

  • The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
    • It was essentially a new feature
  • 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
  • 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:
    • No need for additional discussion
  • Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
    • No
  • 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.
    • N/A

@cubuspl42 The PR is ready for review.