Repository navigation
[Due for payment 2026-10-30] Fix false missingAttendees violation in Search rows #104546
Description
Problem
In Spend → Reports, a report row shows "Report contains expenses with violations.", but the opened report shows no errors. In Spend → Expenses, its expenses show "Multiple attendees required for this category." until the expense or report is opened. Both Search rows re-check the missing-attendees violation on the client and read the top-level attendees field from snapshot data, which is never set, because the attendees live in comment.attendees.
Solution
ExpenseReportListItem and TransactionListItem now read attendees with getAttendees(), which returns modifiedAttendees ?? comment.attendees. This is the same source the Search attendees column already uses, so the rows see the real attendees from snapshot data and no longer add a false missingAttendees violation.
PR
Issue Owner
Current Issue Owner: @nkdengineerMetadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
Type
Projects
- Status
Activity
VickyStash commentedon Oct 21, 2026
PR is ready for the review: #104540
nkdengineer commentedon Oct 22, 2026
Assigned here as I'm the reviewer of the PR.
[-]Fix false missingAttendees violation in Search rows[/-][+][Due for payment 2026-10-30] Fix false missingAttendees violation in Search rows[/+]melvin-bot commentedon Oct 23, 2026
@nkdengineer
The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.5.18-1 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 2026-10-30. 🎊
The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed. Please copy/paste the Contributor+ 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]. If no checklist is needed for this issue, you can click: [no checklist button]
melvin-bot commentedon Oct 26, 2026
@nkdengineer Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!
nkdengineer commentedon Oct 27, 2026
Contributor+ Checklist:
[Contributor] The offending PR and associated issue have been commented on, pointing out the bug it caused and why, so the author and reviewers can learn from the mistake.
Link to the comment on the PR: https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/79050/changes#r4394726168
[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.
Regression Test Proposal
Precondition:
Test:
Do we agree 👍 or 👎