Clarify Approval Options When Held Expenses Exist And Fix Regressions

[mkzie2]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #70383
$ #83259
$ #83261
$ #83264
PROPOSAL: #70383 (comment)

Tests

1. Go to ND
2. Go to WS chat
3. Create 2 expenses
4. Mark 1 of them as hold
5. Submit
6. Verify that we have 2 options to approve the expense (Partial and full)
7. Verify that both ways to approve expense work correctly

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

2. Go to WS chat
3. Create 2 expenses
4. Mark 1 of them as hold
5. Go offline
6. Submit
7. Verify that we have 2 options to approve the expense (Partial and full)
8. Verify that both ways to approve expense work correctly

QA Steps

1. Go to ND
2. Go to WS chat
3. Create 2 expenses
4. Mark 1 of them as hold
5. Submit
6. Verify that we have 2 options to approve the expense (Partial and full)
7. Verify that both ways to approve expense work correctly

• 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 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.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

android-web.mov

iOS: Native

ios.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios-web.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mov

MacOS: Desktop

desktop.mov

[melvin-bot]

Hey, I noticed you changed src/languages/en.ts in a PR from a fork. For security reasons, translations are not generated automatically for PRs from forks.

If you want to automatically generate translations for other locales, an Expensify employee will have to:

1. Look at the code and make sure there are no malicious changes.
2. Run the Generate static translations GitHub workflow. If you have write access and the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

Alternatively, if you are an external contributor, you can run the translation script locally with your own OpenAI API key. To learn more, try running:

npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --help

Typically, you'd want to translate only what you changed by running npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --compare-ref main

[codecov]

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/components/ButtonWithDropdownMenu/index.tsx	86.95% <100.00%> (+0.09%)	⬆️
...rc/components/Icon/chunks/expensify-icons.chunk.ts	0.00% <ø> (ø)
src/components/MoneyReportHeaderModalsContext.tsx	25.00% <ø> (ø)
...oneyReportHeaderPrimaryAction/PayPrimaryAction.tsx	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...neyReportHeaderPrimaryAction/useConfirmApproval.ts	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...ReportPreview/MoneyRequestReportPreviewContent.tsx	65.16% <ø> (+1.67%)	⬆️
...RequestReportPreview/ReportPreviewActionButton.tsx	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/styles/index.ts	48.75% <ø> (ø)
src/components/MoneyReportHeaderModals.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/components/PopoverMenu.tsx	83.01% <95.45%> (+1.15%)	⬆️
... and 6 more
... and 19 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@truph01 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]

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: ce4af78465

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]

Block restricted delegates before invoking approve action

When isDelegateAccessRestricted is true, this component renders the fallback Button and calls onApprove(true) directly, but the new onApprove handlers in MoneyReportHeader / MoneyRequestReportPreviewContent no longer perform the delegate-access guard before approveMoneyRequest. That regresses the previous behavior (showing the no-access modal) and lets restricted delegates trigger approval attempts instead of being stopped.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

[parasharrajat]

@mkzie2 Can you check?

[mkzie2]

I updated!

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Handle held-expense path in confirmApproval callback

The callback now performs approval only in the !isAnyTransactionOnHold branch, so held-expense reports fall through with no action. This callback is still used by payment/selection-mode approve paths (via confirmApproval passed into payment selection), and canApproveIOU() does not exclude held reports, so choosing approve from those menus becomes a silent no-op when any expense is on hold.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

[truph01]

@mkzie2 This PR to fix regressions, should we have the original C+ review it?

[mkzie2]

@truph01 Yeah this PR should be reviewed by @parasharrajat

[mkzie2]

Looks like a flaky test

[mkzie2]

@parasharrajat Friendly bump for review

[parasharrajat]

Will be checking in the morning.

[mkzie2]

@parasharrajat Friendly bump.

[parasharrajat]

Screenshots

🔲 iOS / native

🔲 iOS / Safari

🔲 MacOS / Chrome

🔲 Android / Chrome

🔲 Android / native

[parasharrajat]

Thanks for the Updates. I will catching up on this soon.