83856 migrate room v2

[huult]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #83856
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Same QA step

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

SPLIT_BILL_DETAILS

1. Open a 1:1 DM → tap + → Split expense → submit a split for any amount.
2. Tap the split preview in chat
3. Verify the Split details RHP opens, amount/participants are correct.

ROOM_MEMBERS

1. Open a workspace room → Details → tap Members → verify the Room Members page opens with the correct member list.
2. Press back → verify you return to Report details (not to the room itself, and not to a 404).

ROOM_MEMBER_DETAILS

1. From Room Members, tap any member row → verify the Room Member Details page opens with that user's name/avatar.
2. Press back → verify you return to Room Members (this is the only entryScreen for this route).

ROOM_INVITE

1. Open a room → Details → tap Invite → verify the Room Invite page opens.
2. Press back → verify you return to Report details.

• 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

Screen.Recording.2026-05-29.at.15.47.55.mov

[melvin-bot]

@mananjadhav 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]

[huult]

@MelvinBot I migrated SPLIT_BILL_DETAILS, ROOM_MEMBERS, ROOM_MEMBER_DETAILS, ROOM_INVITE to use dynamic routes in this PR.

Could you help create some test steps so I can verify everything works correctly? Thanks!

[MelvinBot]

Here are test steps that cover each of the 4 migrated routes. The goal is to verify that forward navigation, back navigation, and deep links all still work after dropping :reportID and backTo from these routes.

Setup

• Sign in with two accounts (A = admin, B = member) on the same workspace.
• Have at least one workspace room (e.g. #announce) and at least one 1:1 DM where you can create a split bill.

---

1. SPLIT_BILL_DETAILS — split/:reportActionID

Forward navigation from a 1:1 chat (LHN entry):

• Open a 1:1 DM → tap + → Split expense → submit a split for any amount.
• Tap the split preview in chat → verify the Split details RHP opens, amount/participants are correct.
• Press back → verify you return to the chat (not to a blank page or stale r/:reportID/... URL).

Forward navigation from Search (RHP):

• Open Search → find the split expense → open it from Search.
• Tap the split preview inside the report → verify Split details opens on top of Search RHP.
• Press back → verify you return to the Search RHP (the entryScreens array now includes SEARCH_REPORT, EXPENSE_REPORT, and SEARCH_MONEY_REQUEST_REPORT).

Deep link / refresh (web):

• With the Split details RHP open, copy the URL — it should be .../r/<reportID>/split/<reportActionID> style produced by the dynamic route builder.
• Hard refresh the page → verify the RHP re-opens on the correct split and back still goes to the report.

---

2. ROOM_MEMBERS — members

Forward navigation:

• Open a workspace room → Details → tap Members → verify the Room Members page opens with the correct member list.
• Press back → verify you return to Report details (not to the room itself, and not to a 404).

Deep link:

• Copy the Room Members URL and open it in a new tab while logged in → verify the page loads correctly.

Edge cases:

• As a non‑policy member (or on an archived room), verify the not‑found view still shows and its back button still returns to Report details.
• Verify no Invalid reportID is used to build the ROOM_MEMBERS route warning appears in the JS console.

---

3. ROOM_MEMBER_DETAILS — room-member-details/:accountID

Forward navigation:

• From Room Members, tap any member row → verify the Room Member Details page opens with that user's name/avatar.
• Press back → verify you return to Room Members (this is the only entryScreen for this route).

Remove flow:

• As the room admin, tap Remove from room → confirm → verify you are sent back to Room Members and the member is gone from the list.

Deep link:

• Copy the Room Member Details URL and open it in a new tab → verify the page loads with the correct member and back returns to Room Members.

---

4. ROOM_INVITE — room-invite

Forward navigation from Report Details:

• Open a room → Details → tap Invite → verify the Room Invite page opens.
• Press back → verify you return to Report details.

Forward navigation from Room Members:

• Open Room Members → tap + Invite → verify the Room Invite page opens.
• Press back → verify you return to Room Members (NOT to Report details). This is the most important regression to catch — the new route has both REPORT_DETAILS.DYNAMIC_ROOT and ROOM_MEMBERS.DYNAMIC_ROOT in its entryScreens, so the back stack must pick the correct one.

Invite flow:

• Select 1+ users → tap Next → confirm invite → verify the after‑transition navigation lands on the right place (Room Members if you came from there, Report details otherwise) and the new members are visible in the room.

Edge cases:

• Open Room Invite on an archived room → verify the not‑found view shows and its back button works.
• Verify no Invalid reportID is used to build the ROOM_INVITE route warning appears in the JS console.

---

Cross‑cutting checks (run once per platform)

• JS console clean — no warnings/errors about missing reportID, missing backTo, or SCREENS.ROOM_MEMBERS.ROOT / SCREENS.SPLIT_DETAILS.ROOT (the old constants are removed; any stale reference will throw).
• Linking config — for each of the 4 routes, copying the URL and opening it in a new logged‑in tab should land on the same screen (verifies linkingConfig/config.ts paths are wired up).
• Offline — toggle offline, then exercise forward + back navigation on each route. Pages should still render from cache; nothing should hang on a stale backTo.
• Test IDs renamed — if you have any E2E / Storybook references to RoomMembersPage, RoomMemberDetailsPage, RoomInvitePage, or SplitBillDetailsPage testIDs, update them to the new Dynamic* versions.
• All platforms — repeat the four sections above on Web, Desktop, iOS native, iOS mWeb, Android native, Android mWeb.

The single highest‑risk regression in this PR is the Room Invite → back behavior, because it's the only one of the four screens with two entry points. Spend extra time there.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/SCREENS.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestAction.tsx	62.50% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/Navigation/linkingConfig/OldRoutes.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/Navigation/linkingConfig/config.ts	76.92% <ø> (ø)
...nbox/report/actionContents/ActionContentRouter.tsx	92.10% <ø> (ø)
...box/report/withReportAndReportActionOrNotFound.tsx	0.00% <ø> (ø)
src/pages/inbox/report/withReportOrNotFound.tsx	97.14% <ø> (ø)
...x/report/actionContents/ChatTransactionPreview.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/ROUTES.ts	20.07% <0.00%> (+0.10%)	⬆️
src/pages/DynamicReportDetailsPage.tsx	56.11% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 5 more
... and 75 files with indirect coverage changes

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 82812f23ed

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".

[joekaufmanexpensify]

No product review needed

[mananjadhav]

question for my reference, do we really need to add tests for each route mapping we add in OldRoute?

[huult]

I think yes, just to make sure the redirection works correctly.

[huult]

I think yes, just to make sure the redirection works correctly.

[mananjadhav]

Left a few comments.

[mananjadhav]

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

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web-bt-report-core.mov

[huult]

@mananjadhav I've addressed your comments. Could you review it again? Thanks!

[huult]

The failed checks are not related to this PR, so I will sync with main to fix them.

[mananjadhav]

@huult Can you sync the latest main? I think the issue is fixed on the main branch now.

[huult]

@mjasikowski all yours

[melvin-bot]

@mjasikowski looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

[mjasikowski]

Not an emergency, tests passing well

[OSBotify]

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

[github-actions]

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

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #92052.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-8f6562bf0d0-a45e4eb-bd1f7fe209deeb27b697df83101909c5971321b5/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-8f6562b-a45e4eb-2dda0bca290d73a8b9870b578dce1b5216fc7f48/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://92052.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mjasikowski in version: 9.4.5-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android
• iOS

[MelvinBot]

Help site review: no changes required

I reviewed the changes in this PR against the help site articles under docs/articles. No documentation updates are needed, so I have not created a draft PR.

Why: This is an internal navigation/routing refactor — part of [BT-134] "Migrate Room + Search". It migrates the SPLIT_BILL_DETAILS, ROOM_MEMBERS, ROOM_MEMBER_DETAILS, and ROOM_INVITE routes from the legacy getRoute(..., backTo) pattern to createDynamicRoute() (dynamic routes v2), and renames the corresponding screens/pages. There is no change to any user-facing feature, label, tab, button, or workflow:

• The Split details RHP, Room Members, Room Member Details, and Room Invite pages all behave identically to before.
• Internal deeplink URLs shift (e.g. /r/:reportID/members → /r/:reportID/details/members), but a redirect in OldRoutes.ts preserves the old links, and these internal routes are not documented on the help site.

Docs scan: The only match for the affected feature terms in docs/articles was an incidental "split bills" mention in marketing copy (Switch-between-New-Expensify-and-Expensify-Classic.md), which describes the feature generally and is unaffected by this refactor.

@huult, since no user-facing behavior changed, there is no help site PR to review. If you believe a specific article does need updating, let me know which one and I'll create the draft PR.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 9.4.5-6 🚀

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