Hide Switch to Classic button when classicRedirect nudge is over a month old by allgandalf · Pull Request #88393 · Expensify/App

allgandalf · 2026-04-21T10:58:15Z

Explanation of Change

~60% of users nudged from Classic to NewDot don't return to Classic. To standardise NewDot for that chunk of migrated users, we already hide the "Switch to Expensify Classic" button when the user has classicRedirect.isLockedToNewDot: true. This PR adds a second condition: also hide the button when the user has classicRedirect.dismissed: false with a classicRedirect.timestamp of over one month ago.

Implementation lives in isOldAppRedirectBlocked inside App/src/libs/TryNewDotUtils.ts. Since all existing callers of shouldHideOldAppRedirect go through that gate, every entry point that surfaces the "Switch to Expensify Classic" button picks up the new behavior automatically (InitialSettingsPage, TroubleshootPage, MergeResultPage, TwoFactorAuth SuccessPage, ConfirmNavigateExpensifyClassicModal, useRedirectToExpensifyClassic).

Backend already sets both classicRedirect.dismissed = false and classicRedirect.timestamp the moment a user is nudged, so this is a frontend-only change.

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/626046
PROPOSAL: N/A (internal work, assigned via Slack discussion linked on the issue)

Tests

Sign in as a user on NewDot who was nudged from Classic more than a month ago (classicRedirect.dismissed: false with a classicRedirect.timestamp older than 30 days).
Open Settings.
Verify the "Switch to Expensify Classic" entry is not present in the menu.
Sign in as a user nudged less than a month ago (same dismissed: false but a recent timestamp).
Verify the "Switch to Expensify Classic" entry is present in the menu.
Sign in as a user with classicRedirect.dismissed: true (has previously been to Classic and come back).
Verify the "Switch to Expensify Classic" entry is present in the menu regardless of how old the timestamp is.
Sign in as a user with isLockedToNewDot: true.
Verify the "Switch to Expensify Classic" entry is not present in the menu (unchanged behavior).
Verify that no errors appear in the JS console.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as tests. The check is purely client-side against the already-synced nvp_tryNewDot NVP, so visibility works offline once the NVP has been synced.

QA Steps

Since QA cannot easily control server-side NVP values, use Onyx.merge from the browser console to simulate each state. Onyx is exposed globally on the web build.

Sign in to staging NewDot on the web.
Open Settings and confirm the "Switch to Expensify Classic" entry is present (baseline).

Open DevTools > Console and run:

Onyx.merge('nvp_tryNewDot', {classicRedirect: {dismissed: false, timestamp: '2026-03-01 12:00:00'}});

This simulates a user nudged over a month ago who hasn't dismissed.

Reload Settings and verify the "Switch to Expensify Classic" entry is NOT present.

In the console, simulate a recent nudge:

Onyx.merge('nvp_tryNewDot', {classicRedirect: {dismissed: false, timestamp: new Date().toISOString()}});

Reload Settings and verify the "Switch to Expensify Classic" entry IS present.

In the console, simulate a dismissed user with an old timestamp:

Onyx.merge('nvp_tryNewDot', {classicRedirect: {dismissed: true, timestamp: '2026-01-01 12:00:00'}});

Reload Settings and verify the "Switch to Expensify Classic" entry IS present (dismissed overrides the timestamp check).

In the console, simulate a locked user:

Onyx.merge('nvp_tryNewDot', {classicRedirect: {isLockedToNewDot: true}});

Reload Settings and verify the "Switch to Expensify Classic" entry is NOT present (unchanged behavior).
Verify that no errors appear in the JS console throughout.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

melvin-bot · 2026-04-21T10:58:21Z

@eh2077 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 · 2026-04-21T10:58:26Z

@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]

codecov · 2026-04-21T11:07:43Z

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/libs/TryNewDotUtils.ts	`86.95% <100.00%> (+5.70%)`	⬆️
... and 101 files with indirect coverage changes

puneetlath · 2026-04-21T13:55:37Z

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

OSBotify · 2026-04-21T19:24:32Z

✋ 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 · 2026-04-21T19:25:22Z

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

github-actions · 2026-04-21T19:33:22Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #88393.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-89789a0-cbc9c0e-849f1420ff68a2052e0984a54f05223990685749/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-89789a0-cbc9c0e-82a3ff3b8a98233ae723a8d03002e33d5dbd8abd/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://88393.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-04-23T20:20:37Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 9.3.62-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Android
iOS

allgandalf added 4 commits April 21, 2026 16:22

Add helper to detect stale classicRedirect nudge

e59151b

Hide Switch to Classic button when classicRedirect nudge is stale

67b5b8c

Test isClassicRedirectStale helper

4fd0188

Test isOldAppRedirectBlocked hides button for stale nudge

e09b1a4

allgandalf requested review from a team as code owners April 21, 2026 10:58

melvin-bot Bot assigned allgandalf Apr 21, 2026

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from eh2077 April 21, 2026 10:58

melvin-bot Bot requested review from a team, brunovjk and flaviadefaria and removed request for a team April 21, 2026 10:58

allgandalf requested review from trjExpensify and removed request for brunovjk, eh2077 and flaviadefaria April 21, 2026 11:40

puneetlath self-requested a review April 21, 2026 13:55

puneetlath requested changes Apr 21, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/libs/TryNewDotUtils.ts Outdated

Rename helper to hasBeenInNewDot30Days

2336591

allgandalf requested a review from puneetlath April 21, 2026 18:56

puneetlath approved these changes Apr 21, 2026

View reviewed changes

puneetlath merged commit 89789a0 into Expensify:main Apr 21, 2026
32 of 34 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Apr 23, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-04-23 #88633

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Hide Switch to Classic button when classicRedirect nudge is over a month old#88393

Hide Switch to Classic button when classicRedirect nudge is over a month old#88393
puneetlath merged 5 commits intoExpensify:mainfrom
allgandalf:hide-switch-to-classic-after-one-month

allgandalf commented Apr 21, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Apr 21, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Apr 21, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Apr 21, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading

Uh oh!

puneetlath commented Apr 21, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Apr 21, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Apr 21, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Apr 21, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Apr 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Conversation

allgandalf commented Apr 21, 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

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Apr 21, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Apr 21, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Apr 21, 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!

puneetlath commented Apr 21, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Apr 21, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Apr 21, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Apr 21, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Apr 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

allgandalf commented Apr 21, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Apr 21, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading

puneetlath commented Apr 21, 2026 •

edited

Loading