[NoQA] Feat: add chronological section in deploy checklist by LukasMod · Pull Request #82691 · Expensify/App

LukasMod · 2026-02-17T17:13:01Z

Explanation of Change

This PR adds a chronological section to the StagingDeployCash checklist that shows merged PRs and Mobile-Expensify submodule updates in the order they were merged, making it easier to understand what's included in each build.

How it works:

Fetch merged App PRs and Mobile-Expensify PRs between the two staging tags, now including merge dates alongside PR numbers
Extract Mobile-Expensify submodule update commits from the App commit history
Sort all entries (App PRs + submodule updates) chronologically by author date
Group each Mobile-Expensify PR under the first submodule bump whose date >= the PR's merge date — this is the submodule update that actually brought that PR into the App
Mobile-Expensify PRs merged after the last submodule bump are listed separately as "PRs waiting for Mobile-Expensify submodule update"
For each submodule update commit, look up if a testBuildOnPush.yml workflow run exists and link to it for easy access to adhoc build artifacts. Falls back to displaying a short SHA if no run is found
The section is rendered inside a collapsible
Details
block to keep the checklist clean.

Other changes:

generateStagingDeployCashBodyAndAssignees now takes a named params object instead of positional arguments for readability
CommitType includes authorDate from the GitHub API
getPullRequestsDeployedBetween is replaced by getMergedPRsDeployedBetween which returns MergedPR[] (with dates) and SubmoduleUpdate[] alongside. The old function is kept as a thin wrapper for backward compatibility

Known limitation:
The grouping assumes the first submodule bump after a Mobile-Expensify PR merge is the one that includes it. There's a small chance of a mismatch if a submodule bump happens to not include a just-merged PR, but this should be rare in practice. Keeping it simple for now and will adjust based on real-world usage.

Fixed Issues

$ #79781
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

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

melvin-bot · 2026-02-18T17:24:10Z

@FitseTLT 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]

mountiny · 2026-02-18T22:05:59Z

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-02-18T22:23:45Z

Codex Review: Something went wrong. Try again later by commenting “@codex review”.

Failed to set up container

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".

mountiny · 2026-02-18T22:32:11Z

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 410b351b58

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".

LukasMod · 2026-02-19T11:06:22Z

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-02-19T11:27:18Z

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. 🎉

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".

LukasMod · 2026-02-19T12:12:39Z

@mountiny Can we give it a try? I will be OOO starting Monday and will be back on 11.03, so I can improve or fix anything tomorrow

mountiny · 2026-02-19T13:31:06Z

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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

mountiny

Looks solid, thank you! I wonder how it will do now with CPs

LukasMod · 2026-02-19T14:45:30Z

You may be right that could be issue with date sorting. I will change from commit.commit.author?.date to commit.commit.committer?.date

mountiny · 2026-02-19T14:51:06Z

Is that needed? I can try to merge and see

LukasMod · 2026-02-19T14:55:50Z

I run analysis with claude to focus on this difference and it seems to be a the right way. Lets try with this first

  Author date — when the change was originally written. Set once and preserved across operations like cherry-pick, rebase, am.                                                                                                                       
  Committer date — when the commit was last placed onto the branch. Updated by cherry-pick, rebase, amend.                      
                                                                                                                              
  For a normal merge via GitHub UI, both are identical (set to the merge time).
  For a cherry-pick:
  - Author date stays as the original merge time on main
  - Committer date becomes the time the cherry-pick was performed

mountiny · 2026-02-19T15:32:30Z

Yeah I think the cherry picks area actually a bit tricky here as the build on main will include other changes too

OSBotify · 2026-02-19T15:46:07Z

✋ 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 · 2026-02-19T18:02:06Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.3.23-2 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2026-02-20T16:11:58Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.3.23-3 🚀

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

melvin-bot Bot assigned LukasMod Feb 17, 2026

feat: add chronological section in checklist

6bfa6ad

LukasMod force-pushed the feat/chronological-section-checklist branch from 1d08261 to 6bfa6ad Compare February 18, 2026 17:09

add cspell disabled for commit hashes in tests

410b351

LukasMod mentioned this pull request Feb 18, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-02-27] [Tracking] Use Adhoc Build Snapshots to Identify Deploy Blockers Faster #79781

Closed

LukasMod marked this pull request as ready for review February 18, 2026 17:24

LukasMod requested a review from a team as a code owner February 18, 2026 17:24

melvin-bot Bot requested review from FitseTLT and removed request for a team February 18, 2026 17:24

mountiny self-requested a review February 18, 2026 22:05

mountiny removed the request for review from FitseTLT February 18, 2026 22:06

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Feb 18, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread .github/libs/GitUtils.ts Outdated

restore previous order for getPullRequestsDeployedBetween

442b6b0

mountiny previously approved these changes Feb 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

Use committer.date instead of author.date to sort PRs

d09fdd7

LukasMod dismissed mountiny’s stale review via d09fdd7 February 19, 2026 14:53

mountiny approved these changes Feb 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

mountiny merged commit 787d698 into Expensify:main Feb 19, 2026
29 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Feb 19, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-02-19 #82970

Closed

41 tasks

Conversation

LukasMod commented Feb 17, 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!

melvin-bot Bot commented Feb 18, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Feb 18, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Feb 18, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Feb 18, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

LukasMod commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

LukasMod commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Feb 19, 2026

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

LukasMod commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

LukasMod commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Feb 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

LukasMod commented Feb 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading