[NoQA] Run testBuild.yaml on push to main by LukasMod · Pull Request #78772 · Expensify/App

LukasMod · 2026-01-02T10:33:16Z

Explanation of Change

run on PR merge to main (push)
always web, android and ios
skip for specific files
ref to 'main' branch (mobile-expensify)

Fixed Issues

$ #79781
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
- I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
- 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 shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  - If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
- I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
- 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)
- I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
- I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
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)
I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
If any new file was added I verified that:
- The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
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.
If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
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

melvin-bot · 2026-01-22T11:38:52Z

@bernhardoj 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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 7fe4f1ca67

ℹ️ 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 👍.

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

LukasMod · 2026-01-22T14:04:26Z

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-01-22T14:25:24Z

Codex Review: Something went wrong. Try again later by commenting “@codex review”.

We were unable to download your code in a timely manner.

ℹ️ 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 👍.

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

mountiny · 2026-01-22T21:01:20Z

Reviewer Checklist

I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
- I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
- I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
- I verified the steps cover any possible 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 checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
I verified that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android: HybridApp
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: HybridApp
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
I verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
- I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
- 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 shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
- I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
- 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)
- I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
- I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
If a new component is created I verified that:
- A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
- All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
- The file is named correctly
- The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
- The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
- For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
- Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
- All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
- The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
If any new file was added I verified that:
- The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
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 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.
If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this 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.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

mountiny

We also need to intertwine it with Mobile-Expensify main merges and make sure we run this action when PR in that repo is merged and we wait until that build completes

LukasMod · 2026-01-23T14:59:50Z

@mountiny I moved logic to another file. It will be additionally much easier to test cause in case of revert we can just remove it.

I tried to follow these points:

trigger on push (besides ignored files)
in case trigger from real PR, get that PR number, post message on github about result as before, build from current sha and use submodule in checkout instead of specified branch. Fail if there is no PR number.
in case trigger from OSBotify
- usually comes together as App versions + submodule update (2 pushes)
- build only for push with commit message Update\ Mobile-Expensify\ submodule*
- build only native mobile (no web for submodule update)
- in other cases skip builds and gh post (without failing)
- bot pushes without PR so if there will be such a need we should cover it in app. Now in these builds there is info from which PR it comes from (inside app PULL_REQUEST_NUMBER). For now I left fallback to empty string.

I will do some local tests on Monday with this workflow to check if conditions work before testing on main

LukasMod · 2026-01-23T15:01:39Z

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-01-23T15:22:45Z

Codex Review: Something went wrong. Try again later by commenting “@codex review”.

We were unable to download your code in a timely manner.

ℹ️ 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 👍.

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

mountiny · 2026-01-24T13:04:57Z

Thanks for splitting this up 🙌

bot pushes without PR so if there will be such a need we should cover it in app. Now in these builds there is info from which PR it comes from (inside app PULL_REQUEST_NUMBER). For now I left fallback to empty string.

So when we get the submodule bump, that corresponds to PR merged in Mobile-Expensify, it would be best to post the builds on that PR, did you think of ways we could achieve that?

LukasMod · 2026-01-26T14:39:26Z

Most commits that update the submodule (i.e., version bumps) are not associated with any PRs. They are triggered by a few workflows from the App repo (preDeploy, finishReleaseCycle, or manual based on createNewVersion). These commits usually look like this:

“Update Mobile-Expensify submodule version to 9.3.8-0”

From the Mobile-Expensify side, there are far fewer of these. When a PR is merged, the auto-generated commits point to a specific hash and look more like this:
Update Mobile-Expensify submodule to 60fbc18

This one can likely be traced back to a specific PR in Mobile-Expensify. In this case, it points to:
https://github.com/Expensify/Mobile-Expensify/commit/60fbc18df4995d4af91db06a11a761b125a3c8a1

I’m not sure if this is a good assumption, but we could post a comment only on commits like “Update Mobile-Expensify submodule to ” if there is a related PR in Mobile-Expensify for that hash. These represent real changes that could potentially break something, whereas the other commits are just version bumps that affect the fingerprint and have no associated PR. It looks like there is 1-2 PR per week, maybe we could make move forward without it for now?

@mountiny What do you think about it? cc: @adhorodyski

mountiny · 2026-01-26T21:56:02Z

I guess we can for now, it will just mean that there will be more prs covered in that one build somewhere, we can evaluate later

mountiny

@codex review

mountiny · 2026-01-26T22:33:02Z

@LukasMod anything you would like to still confirm before merging and testing it out?

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 9dbe2febcf

ℹ️ 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 👍.

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

LukasMod · 2026-01-27T07:48:27Z

@mountiny Yes, I will do some local tests today on my forked repo. I will ping you when it will be ready

LukasMod · 2026-01-27T14:06:19Z

@mountiny I finished tests. A few small improvements:

getMergedPullRequest now uses github-script, as the previous approach used a deprecated method
simple buildSummary step to create a view with links to builds, PR, and submodule commit
annotations, early returns

I tested 4 scenarios, some screens from fork below:

Happy path. User creates PR and it's merged:
- all builds
- summary with all info
- PR linked

OSBotify push with commit message: "Update Mobile-Expensify submodule version to..."
- only native mobile builds, web skipped
- summary with all info

OSBotify push with different commit message than expected in 2.
- fast skip
- no fail as it's expected case

Edge case. User (not OSBotify) pushes to main without a PR - not sure if that’s even possible but better to secure it
- workflow fails

mountiny · 2026-02-02T06:43:27Z

Thanks! Just a little be vary of merging this during the sprint week and now when we have the deploy freeze, I will wait for Monday or Tuesday

adhorodyski · 2026-02-03T11:16:26Z

@mountiny the day has come!

mountiny

Ok thanks, I think we can dry these up later once we have confidence this works fine

mountiny · 2026-02-04T06:01:16Z

          IOS: ${{ needs.iosHybrid.result }}
          ANDROID_LINK: ${{ needs.androidHybrid.outputs.ROCK_ANDROID_ADHOC_INDEX_URL }}
-          IOS_LINK: ${{ needs.iosHybrid.outputs.ROCK_IOS_ADHOC_INDEX_URL }}
+          IOS_LINK: ${{ needs.iosHybrid.outputs.ROCK_IOS_ADHOC_INDEX_URL }}


Seems like the last line changed here

mountiny · 2026-02-04T06:01:36Z

+
+

Suggested change

taken care in follow up fix #81371

mountiny · 2026-02-04T06:01:45Z

+
+

Suggested change

taken care in follow up fix #81371

mountiny · 2026-02-04T06:08:25Z

@LukasMod we should monitor the build times given that it is not waiting on the previous builds https://github.com/Expensify/App/actions/workflows/testBuildOnPush.yml

mountiny · 2026-02-04T06:08:54Z

Ios failed here https://github.com/Expensify/App/actions/runs/21660529601/job/62444286201

OSBotify · 2026-02-05T20:46:06Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.3.13-1 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅

OSBotify · 2026-02-05T21:46:32Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.3.15-0 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅

OSBotify · 2026-02-10T07:02:27Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/lakchote in version: 9.3.15-10 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅

melvin-bot Bot assigned LukasMod Jan 2, 2026

run testBuild.yaml on pull_request

3d5a227

LukasMod force-pushed the feat/adhoc-on-pull-requests branch from de4181d to 3d5a227 Compare January 22, 2026 07:44

LukasMod added 2 commits January 22, 2026 09:57

run testBuild.yaml on push instead of pull_request

310343a

add guard if MERGED_PR_NUMBER does not exist

7fe4f1c

LukasMod marked this pull request as ready for review January 22, 2026 11:38

LukasMod requested a review from a team as a code owner January 22, 2026 11:38

melvin-bot Bot requested review from bernhardoj and removed request for a team January 22, 2026 11:38

LukasMod changed the title ~~[NoQA] Run testBuild.yaml on pull_request~~ [NoQA] Run testBuild.yaml on push to main Jan 22, 2026

LukasMod mentioned this pull request Jan 22, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-02-27] [Tracking] Use Adhoc Build Snapshots to Identify Deploy Blockers Faster #79781

Closed

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jan 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread .github/workflows/testBuild.yml

do getMobileExpensifyPR only if workflow_dispatch

37d83e7

mountiny self-requested a review January 22, 2026 21:00

mountiny reviewed Jan 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread .github/workflows/testBuild.yml Outdated

LukasMod added 3 commits January 23, 2026 09:04

remove concurrency

e39ef74

handle submodule updates from OSBotify

8f1f636

combine set App ref step

cf810e6

add testBuildOnPush workflow

9dbe2fe

mountiny previously approved these changes Jan 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jan 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread .github/workflows/testBuildOnPush.yml

fix warning, add buildSummary

4ae8ffa

LukasMod dismissed mountiny’s stale review via 4ae8ffa January 27, 2026 12:51

fix summary PR Link text

c1304b3

LukasMod added 2 commits January 29, 2026 17:48

Merge main

c036079

update xcode version

a96a985

LukasMod requested a review from mountiny January 30, 2026 07:00

mountiny approved these changes Feb 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

mountiny merged commit 2909966 into Expensify:main Feb 4, 2026
14 checks passed

github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Feb 4, 2026

Investigate workflow job failing on main: test / test (job 3) #81370

Closed

mountiny mentioned this pull request Feb 5, 2026

[NoQA] Fix: add concurrency config to testBuildOnPush #81371

Merged

53 tasks done

This was referenced Feb 5, 2026

Fix: reuse concurrency group for testBuild and testBuildOnPush #81516

Closed

[NoQA] Fix: reuse concurrency group for testBuild and testBuildOnPush #81520

Closed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Feb 5, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-02-05 #81590

Closed

Conversation

LukasMod commented Jan 2, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

LukasMod commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Jan 22, 2026

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

LukasMod commented Jan 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

LukasMod commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Jan 24, 2026

Uh oh!

LukasMod commented Jan 26, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Jan 26, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Jan 26, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

LukasMod commented Jan 27, 2026

Uh oh!

LukasMod commented Jan 27, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Feb 2, 2026

Uh oh!

adhorodyski commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mountiny Feb 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mountiny Feb 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

LukasMod Feb 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mountiny Feb 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

LukasMod Feb 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

LukasMod commented Jan 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading

LukasMod commented Jan 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

LukasMod commented Jan 26, 2026 •

edited

Loading