Skip to content

馃崚 Cherry pick PR #101104 to production 馃崚 - #101246

Closed
os-botify[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
productionfrom
cherry-pick-production-101104-35015704781-1
Closed

os-botify[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
productionfrom
cherry-pick-production-101104-35015704781-1

Conversation

@os-botify

@os-botify os-botify Bot commented Sep 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

馃崚 Cherry pick #101104 to production 馃崚

This PR had conflicts when we tried to cherry-pick it to production. You'll need to manually perform the cherry-pick, using the following steps:

git fetch
git checkout cherry-pick-production-101104-35015704781-1
git cherry-pick -S -x --mainline 1 15012f0e52c5420b643afd1f022ac79e2f53cbf8

Then manually resolve conflicts, and commit the change with git cherry-pick --continue. Lastly, please run:

git commit --amend -m "$(git log -1 --pretty=%B)" -m "(cherry-picked to production by luacmartins)"

This last part is important. It will help us keep track of who triggered this CP, and will ensure that version bumps are tracked correctly. Once all that's done, push your changes with git push origin cherry-pick-production-101104-35015704781-1, and then open this PR for review.

Note that you must test this PR, and both the author and reviewer checklist should be completed, just as if you were merging the PR to main.

Important

This PR should ideally be merged by a member of the mobile-deployers team. If it is merged by someone who is not a deployer, the staging deploy triggered by the merge will fail and will need to be manually re-triggered (not just retried) via the deploy workflow.

Pro-tip: If this PR appears to have conflicts against the production base, it means that the version on production has been updated. The easiest thing to do if you see this is to close the PR and re-run the CP.

PR Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
    • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
    • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
    • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
  • I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
  • If new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
    • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
    • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
  • I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari

(cherry picked from commit 11d405c)

(cherry-picked to production by luacmartins)
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Sep 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@aldo-expensify Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

馃挕 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 35ad688280

鈩癸笍 About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 馃憤.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread package.json
{
"name": "new.expensify",
"version": "9.4.77-4",
"version": "9.4.79-0",

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P1 Badge Apply PR #101104 before publishing the version bump

In this production cherry-pick, the commit changes only version metadata and the Mobile-Expensify version pointer; none of the changes from merge 15012f0e52c5420b643afd1f022ac79e2f53cbf8 requested in the commit message are present. Merging this revision would therefore deploy version 9.4.79-0 without the fix from PR #101104, so complete the instructed manual cherry-pick and include its resolved diff before merging.

Useful? React with 馃憤聽/ 馃憥.

@luacmartins

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Gonna close this one given we're close to deploying

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants