Title Field RNVP Optimization For Accurate Report Names In Expensify

Understanding the Issue: Optimistic Report Names and the Missing Title Field

Hey guys, let's dive into a tricky problem we've been facing with optimistic report names in our Expensify app. Optimistic report names, in a nutshell, are the names the frontend generates instantly, giving the user a snappy, responsive feel while the actual name is being processed in the backend. It's like a placeholder that gets updated later. The issue arises when these optimistic names are computed without considering a crucial piece of information: the title field in the report name value pairs (rNVP). This title field acts as a flag. Its absence signals that a report has been manually renamed by a user. If we optimistically recompute the name of a manually renamed report, we risk overwriting the user's custom title, leading to a frustrating experience.

Imagine this scenario: you've carefully renamed a report to something specific, maybe "Project Phoenix Expenses - Q3 2024." Now, picture our system, in its eagerness to be helpful, automatically changing it back to something generic like "Monthly Expenses." Annoying, right? That's the core of the problem we're trying to solve. The lack of this title field is used to signify that the report has been manually renamed, and is used to prevent the name from being recomputed and overriding the manually set name.

To illustrate the impact, consider the case where report names can be changed. A manually renamed report should retain its manual name even when the policy report name formula is updated. Without the proper logic, this doesn't happen, and the user's custom name gets reverted. This is not ideal for the user experience, as manually renamed reports should maintain their names, reflecting the user's explicit choice. This ensures clarity and organization for the user, especially when dealing with numerous reports with specific contexts. The goal is to respect the user's customization while still providing the benefits of optimistic updates for other reports.

The Problem in Detail: A Visual Example

Let's visualize this with an example. The provided image clearly illustrates the problem. We see a situation where a report has been manually renamed. Now, when the policy report name formula is updated, the system, without the correct logic, overwrites the manual name. This is precisely what we want to avoid. The image serves as a powerful visual aid, highlighting the importance of addressing this issue to maintain a consistent and user-friendly experience.

This scenario underscores the importance of preserving manual customizations. When a user takes the time to rename a report, they likely have a specific reason. Overwriting that name disrupts their workflow and can lead to confusion. The ideal system should be smart enough to recognize these manual changes and respect them, while still providing the benefits of automatic naming conventions where appropriate. This requires a nuanced approach that considers the user's intent and the specific context of the report.

Proposed Solution: Update the updateTitleFieldToMatchPolicy Function

Alright, so how do we fix this? The solution lies in carefully handling the title field when reports are created or moved between policies. Specifically, we need to implement the logic within the updateTitleFieldToMatchPolicy function. This function, as detailed in this Google Doc, is the key to ensuring our optimistic report names behave correctly. The core idea is to check if the title field rNVP already exists before we even attempt to optimistically compute the report name.

By implementing this check, we can effectively prevent the overwriting of manually renamed reports. The updateTitleFieldToMatchPolicy function acts as a gatekeeper, ensuring that the optimistic name computation only proceeds when the title field is present. This simple yet crucial check allows us to differentiate between reports that are eligible for optimistic renaming and those that should retain their manual titles. This approach aligns with the principle of respecting user input and maintaining a consistent user experience.

This solution ensures that the system respects the user's manual changes while still allowing for the benefits of optimistic updates in other cases. This nuanced approach is crucial for creating a user-friendly and efficient expense management system. By carefully managing the title field, we can strike the right balance between automation and user control, ensuring that the system behaves predictably and respects the user's intentions. This leads to a more intuitive and satisfying user experience overall.

Implementing the Solution: A Step-by-Step Approach

To break it down further, the implementation involves a few key steps:

1. Locate the updateTitleFieldToMatchPolicy function: This is our central point of modification. We need to find this function in the codebase and understand its current behavior.
2. Implement the title field check: Within the function, we'll add a check to see if the title field rNVP exists for the report. This is the core of the solution.
3. Conditional optimistic name computation: Only if the title field exists should we proceed with optimistically computing the report name. Otherwise, we skip the computation, preserving the manual name.
4. Apply to report creation and policy changes: We need to ensure this logic is applied both when reports are initially created and when reports are moved between policies. This covers all relevant scenarios.

By following these steps, we can effectively address the issue and ensure that manually renamed reports are protected from being overwritten. This solution is both targeted and comprehensive, addressing the root cause of the problem while minimizing the risk of unintended side effects. The result is a more robust and user-friendly expense management system.

Summary: Protecting Manual Report Names for a Better User Experience

In conclusion, the key takeaway here is the importance of the title field in preserving manually renamed reports. By implementing a simple check within the updateTitleFieldToMatchPolicy function, we can prevent the overwriting of these names and provide a better user experience. This solution demonstrates the importance of considering seemingly small details, like the presence or absence of a field, in the overall design of a system. By carefully managing these details, we can create a more intuitive and user-friendly application.

Next Steps: Testing and Validation

Of course, the next crucial step is thorough testing. We need to create test cases that specifically cover the scenario of manually renamed reports and policy updates. This will ensure that our solution is working as expected and that we haven't introduced any regressions. Testing is paramount to ensuring the stability and reliability of our application. We need to rigorously validate the solution across various scenarios to ensure it behaves correctly in all situations. This includes testing with different policy configurations, user roles, and report types. A comprehensive testing strategy will give us confidence that the solution is robust and addresses the problem effectively.

We need to verify that the fix doesn't introduce any unintended side effects. This requires careful monitoring of the application's behavior after the changes are deployed. By actively monitoring the system and responding promptly to any issues, we can ensure a smooth and seamless experience for our users. Continuous monitoring and feedback are crucial for maintaining the quality and reliability of our application over time.

Collaboration and Communication

Finally, let's give a shoutout to @sosek108 for bringing this to our attention! Collaboration and open communication are key to solving these kinds of issues effectively. By sharing insights and working together, we can create a better product for everyone. Open communication fosters a culture of learning and improvement, where team members can learn from each other's experiences and perspectives. This collaborative approach not only helps us solve problems more effectively but also builds a stronger and more cohesive team. By sharing knowledge and supporting each other, we can collectively contribute to the success of the project.

repair-input-keyword: Require title field rNVP to compute optimistic report names

title: Title Field rNVP Optimization for Accurate Report Names in Expensify