Fix: preserve iouType for invoice/pay when reselecting a participant on confirm page by MelvinBot · Pull Request #94536 · Expensify/App

MelvinBot · 2026-06-25T05:36:53Z

Explanation of Change

On the confirmation page, tapping the To field opens the inline ParticipantPicker. When a participant is (re)selected, handleParticipantsAdded ran navigation.setParams({iouType: 'create'}) for any iouType that wasn't split or create. For the invoice flow (iouType === 'invoice') — and equally the pay-someone flow (iouType === 'pay') — this rewrote the route param from invoice/pay to create, so the confirmation page re-rendered as a manual expense confirm page instead of the invoice/pay confirm page.

The conversion to create is only correct for the manual-expense flows (submit/track), which is exactly what the sibling participantPickerIOUType already encodes (IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx:293). This change narrows the guard in handleParticipantsAdded to mirror that intent — only convert to create when iouType is submit or track — so invoice and pay keep their route param and the correct confirm page is shown after reselecting a participant.

The offending PR (#94134) was reverted, restoring the NEW_MANUAL_EXPENSE_FLOW beta gate, but this latent bug in the handler remained. This fixes the underlying bug so it doesn't resurface when the new manual expense flow is re-enabled.

Fixed Issues

$ #94263
PROPOSAL: #94263 (comment)

Tests

Enable the Invoice beta and the new manual expense flow.
Open FAB > Send invoice.
Enter an amount > Next.
Select a user.
On the confirm page, tap the To field.
Tap the same user.
Verify the RHP returns to the invoice confirm page (not the manual expense confirm page).
Repeat for the Pay someone flow and verify it returns to the pay confirm page.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as tests.

QA Steps

Enable the Invoice beta.
Open FAB > Send invoice.
Enter an amount > Next.
Select a user.
On the confirm page, tap the To field.
Tap the same user.
Verify the RHP returns to the invoice confirm page (not the manual expense confirm page).

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Co-authored-by: thelullabyy <thelullabyy@users.noreply.github.com>

codecov · 2026-06-25T05:40:59Z

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...es/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx	`65.17% <0.00%> (ø)`
... and 14 files with indirect coverage changes

thelullabyy · 2026-06-26T04:20:10Z

@MelvinBot You are using the wrong PR description template. Please use this one

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Expensify/App/main/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md

After that replace all [ ] by [x]

Finally, open PR for review

melvin-bot · 2026-06-26T04:22:43Z

@thelullabyy 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]

MelvinBot · 2026-06-26T04:22:51Z

🤖 Done, @thelullabyy:

✅ Rebuilt the PR description from the current template, preserving the filled-in Explanation, Fixed Issues, Tests, Offline tests, and QA Steps.
✅ Checked all [ ] → [x].
✅ Marked the PR as ready for review.

thelullabyy · 2026-06-26T04:23:32Z

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 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)
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)
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.
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

Screen.Recording.2026-06-26.at.00.23.03.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-06-26.at.00.18.38.mov

thelullabyy

Agree with the solution

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 27173b3fd6

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".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-06-26T04:28:06Z

                navigation.setParams({iouType: CONST.IOU.TYPE.TRACK});
            } else {
-                if (iouType !== CONST.IOU.TYPE.SPLIT && iouType !== CONST.IOU.TYPE.CREATE) {
+                if (iouType === CONST.IOU.TYPE.SUBMIT || iouType === CONST.IOU.TYPE.TRACK) {


Update the backing report when preserving pay/invoice

When a user in the PAY/INVOICE confirmation page opens the To picker and selects a different recipient, this branch now preserves the route type but the handler still only writes participants and never updates transaction.reportID/the route report. The rest of this screen derives report from the old report ID, and sendMoney/sendInvoice pass that stale chat or invoice room to the API, so the UI can show the newly selected participant while the payment/invoice is created in the previous chat/room. Please mirror the participant-step report update when keeping PAY/INVOICE here.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@thelullabyy I checked this — it's a false positive for this PR. This PR only changes which iouType is preserved (which confirm page / submit branch is used); it doesn't touch transaction.reportID handling or report resolution at all. Both before and after, the recipient branch calls only setMoneyRequestParticipants, and the destination report is resolved at send time from the selected participant, not from a stale ID.

Two reasons the claim doesn't hold for the realistic flows:

PAY: The "To" picker is only interactive when transaction.isFromGlobalCreate is true (MoneyRequestConfirmationList.tsx:252), and PAY is never started from the global FAB (only from a 1:1 chat). So the picker can't be reopened in the pay flow — that half of the concern is unreachable.

INVOICE (from FAB): The route reportID is a freshly-generated optimistic ID with no report in Onyx, so resolveReportForMoneyRequest returns undefined and sendInvoice derives the room from the selected participant via the existingInvoiceReport path (useExpenseSubmission.ts:909). Destination correctly follows the new recipient.

One narrow pre-existing edge case (not a blocker)

There is a genuine stale-room path: invoice-from-FAB → first pick a recipient who already has an existing invoice room → then reselect a different recipient on the confirm page. In that case transaction.reportID still points at the first recipient's room, and resolveReportForMoneyRequest returns it because the route report is undefined (IOUUtils.ts:504-507).

However, this is pre-existing and not introduced or exposed by this PR — pre-PR, handleParticipantsAdded also never updated transaction.reportID (it only flipped the iouType to create, which is the different bug this PR fixes). It lives entirely in resolveReportForMoneyRequest + the participants-step report write, none of which this diff touches. Worth a separate follow-up issue, not a reason to hold this PR.

So I'd resolve this comment — the bug it describes isn't caused by this change.

thelullabyy · 2026-06-26T04:37:36Z

@MelvinBot Please check this comment #94536 (comment)

github-actions · 2026-06-26T19:17:19Z

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

github-actions · 2026-06-26T19:25:34Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #94536.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-34bdf81df42-bb08cca-98a2e49d7657f564b83a2073eaf4fa9339552029/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-34bdf81-bb08cca-a79e650719ca5ad592532c753a3fa32e3cd82225/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://94536.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-06-26T20:01:10Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 9.4.21-2 🚀

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

Fix: preserve iouType for invoice/pay when reselecting participant

27173b3

Co-authored-by: thelullabyy <thelullabyy@users.noreply.github.com>

MelvinBot assigned thelullabyy Jun 25, 2026

MelvinBot requested a review from a team June 25, 2026 05:36

MelvinBot mentioned this pull request Jun 25, 2026

[$250] [Due for payment 2026-07-01] [Due for payment 2026-06-30] Invoice - After reselecting the same user, RHP opens manual expense confirm page #94263

Open

7 tasks

MelvinBot marked this pull request as ready for review June 26, 2026 04:22

MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner June 26, 2026 04:22

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from thelullabyy June 26, 2026 04:22

melvin-bot Bot requested review from heyjennahay and removed request for a team June 26, 2026 04:22

thelullabyy approved these changes Jun 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from puneetlath June 26, 2026 04:25

thelullabyy mentioned this pull request Jun 26, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-07-02] [Due for payment 2026-06-30] [CFI] Show Merchant, Date, Amount Fields in the Scan flow #93854

Open

7 tasks

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jun 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

thelullabyy approved these changes Jun 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

puneetlath approved these changes Jun 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

puneetlath merged commit 34bdf81 into main Jun 26, 2026
45 of 46 checks passed

puneetlath deleted the claude-fixInvoiceParticipantPickerIouType branch June 26, 2026 19:16

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jun 26, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-06-26 #94730

Open

47 tasks

Uh oh!

Conversation

MelvinBot commented Jun 25, 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!

codecov Bot commented Jun 25, 2026 • edited by github-actions Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

thelullabyy commented Jun 26, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 26, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jun 26, 2026

Uh oh!

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

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

thelullabyy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot Jun 26, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

MelvinBot Jun 26, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

thelullabyy commented Jun 26, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 26, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 26, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 26, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

MelvinBot commented Jun 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Jun 25, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading

thelullabyy commented Jun 26, 2026 •

edited

Loading