Skip to content

Remove uneeded calls to approval workflow updates - #82811

Merged
mjasikowski merged 15 commits into
mainfrom
alberto-reOne
May 21, 2026
Merged

mjasikowski merged 15 commits into
mainfrom
alberto-reOne

Conversation

@Gonals

@Gonals Gonals commented Feb 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

SharePolicy.cpp already handles approval workflow updates when an approver is removed, so these extra calls are unnecessary. We want to wait for the Auth PR to deploy, as it does add some Spotnana handling, but this can be reviewed and tested already

Fixed Issues

$ #75020
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  1. Go to newDot
  2. As an admin, create a workspace and invite users A and B
  3. Enable advanced approval and make user A the approver of user B
  4. Remove user A
  5. Confirm user B's approver is now the admin

  1. Go to newDot
  2. As an admin, create a workspace and invite user A
  3. Enable approval and change approver to user A
  4. Create and submit a manual expense as an admin in workspace chat
  5. Remove user A
  6. Dismiss the error message
  7. After dismissing the error message Approver A should still be the workspace approver
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

None

QA Steps

Same as tests

  • 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

@Gonals Gonals self-assigned this Feb 18, 2026
@Gonals
Gonals requested review from a team as code owners February 18, 2026 14:39
@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from brunovjk and joekaufmanexpensify and removed request for a team February 18, 2026 14:39
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Feb 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@brunovjk 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]

@joekaufmanexpensify joekaufmanexpensify left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good for product 👍

@brunovjk

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Is it for review? Thanks

@Gonals

Gonals commented Feb 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Is it for review? Thanks

Yes. You can read the explanation in the main post

@brunovjk

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Gonals it seems the bug is still reproducible:

Screen.Recording.2026-02-19.at.11.38.12.mov

Can you reproduce it? Thank you.

@Gonals

Gonals commented Feb 26, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Coming back to this in a bit!

@brunovjk

brunovjk commented Apr 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Hi @Gonals, do you have any updates for me here? Thanks.

@Gonals Gonals changed the title [HOLD] Remove uneeded calls to approval workflow updates Remove uneeded calls to approval workflow updates Apr 7, 2026
@Gonals

Gonals commented Apr 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Hi @Gonals, do you have any updates for me here? Thanks.

Ah, thanks for the ping! This should be OFF HOLD now. It seems to work fine for me

@brunovjk

brunovjk commented Apr 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Hi @Gonals it seems the first part of the test steps is going well:

Screen.Recording.2026-04-08.at.17.22.00.mov

However, the original bug seems to still be reproducible:

Screen.Recording.2026-04-08.at.17.25.42.mov

Maybe I'm doing something wrong, can you reproduce it? Thank you.

@Gonals

Gonals commented Apr 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Hi @Gonals it seems the first part of the test steps is going well:

Screen.Recording.2026-04-08.at.17.22.00.mov
However, the original bug seems to still be reproducible:

Screen.Recording.2026-04-08.at.17.25.42.mov
Maybe I'm doing something wrong, can you reproduce it? Thank you.

Hmmm. I'll do further investigation.
For now, let's move this PR forwards. It still handles cleaning up duplicate calls

@brunovjk

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Great, but I double-checked and even the first part of the tests isn't passing now:

Screen.Recording.2026-04-17.at.10.01.54.mov

@Gonals could it be related to the warnings/errors here? I'll review it again as soon as you fix them, thank you.

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Apr 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/pages/workspace/WorkspaceMembersPage.tsx 63.68% <ø> (+2.57%) ⬆️
...s/workspace/members/WorkspaceMemberDetailsPage.tsx 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 9 files with indirect coverage changes

@brunovjk

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I'm a little busy with another PR today, but I'll test by the end of the day.

@Gonals Gonals changed the title Remove uneeded calls to approval workflow updates [HOLD] Remove uneeded calls to approval workflow updates May 18, 2026
@Gonals

Gonals commented May 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

I'm a little busy with another PR today, but I'll test by the end of the day.

Setting a HOLD on it for now! I'm seeing the bug (sometimes). Currently investigating the backend.

@Gonals Gonals changed the title [HOLD] Remove uneeded calls to approval workflow updates Remove uneeded calls to approval workflow updates May 18, 2026
@Gonals

Gonals commented May 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Actually, we are good to go. The fix was frontend. Give it a shot!

@brunovjk

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

It still seems strange to me @Gonals, I can't figure out where the problem is, I'll continue investigating.

Screen.Recording.2026-05-19.at.12.31.10.mov

@Gonals

Gonals commented May 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

It still seems strange to me @Gonals, I can't figure out where the problem is, I'll continue investigating.

Screen.Recording.2026-05-19.at.12.31.10.mov

Any chance the report was not submitted? You should have seen an error

@brunovjk

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks for noticing and sorry for the confusion. I tested it again now and everything looks good, congrats on the hard work :D

@brunovjk

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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 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
82811_android_web.mov
iOS: HybridApp
iOS: mWeb Safari
82811_ios_web.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
82811_web_chrome.mov

@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested a review from mjasikowski May 20, 2026 14:47
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented May 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@mjasikowski 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]

@mjasikowski
mjasikowski merged commit 91f9925 into main May 21, 2026
44 checks passed
@mjasikowski
mjasikowski deleted the alberto-reOne branch May 21, 2026 12:48
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚧 @mjasikowski has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mjasikowski in version: 9.3.79-1 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

@MelvinBot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No help site changes are needed for this PR.

This PR removes redundant frontend code that duplicated approval workflow updates when removing workspace members — the backend (SharePolicy.cpp) already handles this automatically. The user-facing behavior is unchanged.

The relevant help site articles (Managing-Workspace-Members and Add-Approvals) don't document the automatic approver reassignment on member removal, and since no user-facing behavior changed, no documentation updates are required.

@mitarachim

mitarachim commented May 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@Gonals This PR is failing because of a regression issue #91378
Screenshot 2026-05-22 at 9 25 45 AM

The issue is reproducible in: Android , Web

Bug7160200_1779409548930.bandicam_2026-05-22_01-01-58-466.mp4

@lanitochka17

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Deploy Blocker ##91439 was identified to be related to this PR

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.3.79-4 🚀

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

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants