Skip to content

[Payment due @Krishna2323] Fix submit approver selection after retract and workflow changes - #89393

Merged
mollfpr merged 32 commits into
mainfrom
lucien/fix-submit-approver-rca
May 8, 2026
Merged

mollfpr merged 32 commits into
mainfrom
lucien/fix-submit-approver-rca

Conversation

@lakchote

@lakchote lakchote commented May 1, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

This fixes submit approver selection by preserving the existing report manager only when policy routing data is unreliable, recomputing when reliable workflow data is available.

Fixed Issues

Related to #89347 and #89365

Fixes the original issue https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/612574

Tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Test 1

Action Performed:

  1. Create Admin account with Gmail
  2. Create Collect workspace, set Workflows to enabled
  3. Invite Employee and Approver with Gmail accounts to this workspace
  4. Enable Workflows > Delay submissions and set it to Manually
  5. Enable Approvals in Workflows and set Approver account as Approver
  6. Login as the employee and create new expense report. Don't submit it.
  7. Login as Admin and change approver to Admin
  8. Go to Workspace chat and submit report created by employee

Expected Result:
An admin can successfully submit a report created by an employee for the previous approver.

Screen.Recording.2026-05-01.at.15.29.14.mov

Test 2

Preconditions

  • User is an Admin of the Workspace
  • Submission frequency enabled and set to Manual
  • Add approvals enabled
  • Make or track payments enabled
  • A separate submitter has been invited to the workspace (tester must have access to this account too)
  • A separate admin has been invited to the workspace as a secondary approver (tester must have access to this account too)
  1. As the submitter, create a manual expense and submit it
  2. As the main admin - Approve the report, which sends it to the secondary approver for review
  3. As the submitter - Go offline - Click on the "More" button
  4. Click "Retract"
  5. As the submitter - Go online - Submit the report again

Expected Result:
Employee can submit the report again

Screen.Recording.2026-05-01.at.15.35.24.mov

Offline tests

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Same as in tests

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 / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • MacOS / Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS / Desktop
  • 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 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 the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • 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 verified the translation was requested/reviewed 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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • 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.js 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 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
    • If we are not using the full Onyx data that we loaded, I've added the proper selector in order to ensure the component only re-renders when the data it is using changes
      • 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(themeColors.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 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.
  • 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 author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

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

@lakchote lakchote self-assigned this May 1, 2026
@lakchote
lakchote marked this pull request as ready for review May 1, 2026 14:00
@lakchote
lakchote requested review from a team as code owners May 1, 2026 14:00
@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from JmillsExpensify and removed request for a team May 1, 2026 14:00
@lakchote
lakchote requested review from Krishna2323 and removed request for a team and JmillsExpensify May 1, 2026 14:00
@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested a review from mollfpr May 1, 2026 14:01
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented May 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@mollfpr 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]

@lakchote
lakchote requested a review from JmillsExpensify May 1, 2026 14:01
@lakchote

lakchote commented May 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@Krishna2323 feel free to take a look, thanks!

@codecov

codecov Bot commented May 1, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/libs/PolicyUtils.ts 65.76% <100.00%> (+0.30%) ⬆️
src/libs/actions/IOU/ReportWorkflow.ts 78.38% <100.00%> (-0.06%) ⬇️
src/libs/actions/Search.ts 29.77% <100.00%> (+2.46%) ⬆️
... and 229 files with indirect coverage changes

@lakchote

lakchote commented May 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Already looking forward to the next diff.

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread src/libs/ReportUtils.ts Outdated
Comment thread src/libs/PolicyUtils.ts Outdated
@Krishna2323

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Test 1

Action Performed:

  1. Create Admin account with Gmail
  2. Create Collect workspace, set Workflows to enabled
  3. Invite Employee and Approver with Gmail accounts to this workspace
  4. Enable Workflows > Delay submissions and set it to Manually
  5. Enable Approvals in Workflows and set Approver account as Approver
  6. Login as the employee and create new expense report. Don't submit it.
  7. Login as Admin and change approver to Admin
  8. Go to Workspace chat and submit report created by employee

Expected Result: An admin can successfully sub

@lakchote this test is failing:

Monosnap.screencast.2026-05-05.20-00-27.mp4

@lakchote

lakchote commented May 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@Krishna2323 I've tested with the new changes, and the test now works. Can you verify it again please?

@Krishna2323

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@lakchote I tested it on web and it worked, but it failed again on iOS native.

web_chrome.mp4
ios_hybrid_2_failing.mp4

@lakchote

lakchote commented May 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@lakchote I tested it on web and it worked, but it failed again on iOS native.

I'll take a look tomorrow, thank you

@lakchote

lakchote commented May 6, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@Krishna2323 I'm not able to reproduce the issue on iOS.

Could you please tell me who is the user in the iOS video example you have? I don't see any admins in your members list

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented May 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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

@lakchote

lakchote commented May 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Asked QA for a retest of those issues on Web/iOS/Android in the meantime

@Krishna2323

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Checking...

@Krishna2323

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@lakchote I can still reproduce the issue, but it’s also reproducible on main. This happens when the approver is changed and I submit a report while it’s in the loading state:

This PR:

Monosnap.screencast.2026-05-07.18-19-35.mp4

Main

Monosnap.screencast.2026-05-07.18-27-13.mp4

@Krishna2323

Krishna2323 commented May 7, 2026 •

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
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • 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_hybrid_1.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
android_chrome.mp4
iOS: HybridApp
Monosnap.screencast.2026-05-07.18-19-35.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
ios_safari.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web_chrome_2.mp4
web_chrome.mp4

@Krishna2323 Krishna2323 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.

LGTM!

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot changed the title Fix submit approver selection after retract and workflow changes [Payment due @Krishna2323] Fix submit approver selection after retract and workflow changes May 7, 2026
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented May 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🎯 @Krishna2323, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉

A payment issue will be created for your review once this PR is deployed to production.
E/E issue linked to the PR - no internal issue.

If payment is not needed (e.g., regression PR review fix etc), react with 👎 to this comment to prevent the payment issue from being created.

@mollfpr
mollfpr merged commit b1951f7 into main May 8, 2026
44 checks passed
@mollfpr
mollfpr deleted the lucien/fix-submit-approver-rca branch May 8, 2026 02:58
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented May 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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

@OSBotify

OSBotify commented May 8, 2026

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

OSBotify commented May 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mollfpr in version: 9.3.69-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

@MelvinBot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No help site changes are required for this PR.

The changes fix internal approval routing logic (getSubmitReportManagerAccountID in PolicyUtils.ts) and update ReportWorkflow.ts/Search.ts to use the new function. These are bug fixes to existing submit/approval workflow behavior — no new features, UI changes, or user-facing behavior changes that would affect documentation under docs/articles.

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Beamanator in version: 9.3.69-18 🚀

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

@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented May 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🤖 Payment issue created: #90266

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.

5 participants