Skip to content

Fix - Expense - Error submitting expense after changing submission frequency from Manual to Instant #75792

Merged
AndrewGable merged 15 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
FitseTLT:fix-allowing-adding-expense-for-submitted-report-for-submit-and-close-policy
Dec 11, 2025
Merged

Fix - Expense - Error submitting expense after changing submission frequency from Manual to Instant #75792
AndrewGable merged 15 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
FitseTLT:fix-allowing-adding-expense-for-submitted-report-for-submit-and-close-policy

Conversation

@FitseTLT

@FitseTLT FitseTLT commented Nov 21, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #72793
PROPOSAL: #72793 (comment)

Tests

  1. Create a workspace
  2. Go to workspace chat
  3. Create an expense in workspace chat
  4. Click Submit on the expense preview
  5. Go to workspace settings > Workflows
  6. Disable Add approvals and Make or track payments
  7. Change Submission frequency to Instantly
  8. Go back to the workspace chat
  9. Open the expense report in (2)
  10. Verify that you cannot add an expense to it.
  11. Go back to the workspace chat
  12. Create an expense
  13. Verify that the new expense is added to a new report not the submitted report above.
  14. Create an empty report on the workspace chat
  15. Open the report
  16. Click on more options on the header
  17. Verify that Add Expense is included in the menu, and a new expense can be added to the draft report.
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as above

QA Steps

Same as above

  • 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
    • 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 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 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 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 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 form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label 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
2025-11-26.15-59-05.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
2025-11-21.23-06-34.mp4
iOS: Native
2025-11-26.15-47-15.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
2025-11-21.23-08-16.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
2025-11-21.23-04-16.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
2025-11-21.23-06-18.mp4

@FitseTLT FitseTLT requested review from a team as code owners November 21, 2025 21:19
@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested a review from brunovjk November 21, 2025 21:19
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Nov 21, 2025

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]

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested review from trjExpensify and removed request for a team November 21, 2025 21:19
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Nov 21, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/libs/ReportUtils.ts 73.42% <100.00%> (+0.04%) ⬆️
...es/iou/request/step/IOURequestEditReportCommon.tsx 85.07% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 27 files with indirect coverage changes

@trjExpensify trjExpensify 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.

I think you need to work on the test steps a little here. If you look at the original parent issue OP...

  1. The user has manual submission frequency, payment and approvals enabled.
  2. They create an expense > it creates a draft report.
  3. They submit the draft report > that report is now in the processing state.
  4. They then change the workspace settings to disable payments and approvals, set the submission frequency to instantly
  5. They create a new expense
  6. It automatically adds that expense to the existing processing report and throws an unexpected error.

Your QA tests or vids don't actually show that flow to confirm the bug as being fixed.

@FitseTLT

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

I think you need to work on the test steps a little here. If you look at the original parent issue OP...

  1. The user has manual submission frequency, payment and approvals enabled.
  2. They create an expense > it creates a draft report.
  3. They submit the draft report > that report is now in the processing state.
  4. They then change the workspace settings to disable payments and approvals, set the submission frequency to instantly
  5. They create a new expense
  6. It automatically adds that expense to the existing processing report and throws an unexpected error.

Your QA tests or vids don't actually show that flow to confirm the bug as being fixed.

@trjExpensify, the test step is checking for two cases. With disabled payments and approvals, the submission frequency set to instantly

  1. adding expenses is disallowed for submitted reports
  2. adding expense should be allowed for draft reports (11. Create an empty report on the workspace chat )

@trjExpensify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Yes, but it's not covering the actual reported flow in the OP of the parent issue. That not being adding an expense manually to an existing outstanding processing report after making the workspace setting change, but creating an expense and it automatically being added to that report erroneously.

Minimally, your test should cover that flow exactly. 👍

@FitseTLT

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Ok I think I got you. Can you recheck it now?

@brunovjk

brunovjk commented Dec 2, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Excuse me @trjExpensify, but do you thik the test steps are sufficient now? Thank you.

@trjExpensify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Yep 👍

@trjExpensify trjExpensify self-requested a review December 2, 2025 21:16
trjExpensify
trjExpensify previously approved these changes Dec 2, 2025
@brunovjk

brunovjk commented Dec 3, 2025

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 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
75792_android_web.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
75792_android_web.mov
iOS: HybridApp
75792_ios_native.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
75792_ios_web.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
75792_web_chrome.mov

@brunovjk brunovjk 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. The warning doesnt look from this PR, what do you think @FitseTLT? Thank you.

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested a review from AndrewGable December 8, 2025 21:52
@FitseTLT

FitseTLT commented Dec 9, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

LGTM. The warning doesnt look from this PR, what do you think @FitseTLT? Thank you.

It es lint changed error linked to getReportName I am not sure if it is related. WDYT @AndrewGable ?

@AndrewGable

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I assume we have to fix them if the CI/CD is saying we have to

@FitseTLT

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Fixed @AndrewGable

Comment thread src/libs/ReportNameUtils.ts Outdated
@FitseTLT

FitseTLT commented Dec 10, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@AndrewGable I have suppressed the deprecated lint error as recommended here so u can proceed now.

@AndrewGable AndrewGable merged commit 9db7100 into Expensify:main Dec 11, 2025
30 checks passed
@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/AndrewGable in version: 9.2.78-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/AndrewGable in version: 9.2.78-8 🚀

platform result
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🕸 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.

5 participants