Ignore scrolling to unread message in transaction thread#94704
Conversation
|
@codex review |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: d2b8c1924b
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".
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: ec1611ef53
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".
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 9d75a30780
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".
VickyStash
force-pushed
the
VickyStash/bugfix/94668-improve-transaction-thread-opening
branch
from
b74bc53 to
bb1002a
Compare
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: bb1002a6ab
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".
| oldestUnreadReportAction, | ||
| } = usePaginatedReportActions(reportID, reportActionIDFromRoute, { | ||
| shouldLinkToOldestUnreadReportAction: true, | ||
| shouldLinkToOldestUnreadReportAction: !shouldBeAlignedToTop, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When an unread transaction thread/expense report is opened, this stops the local pagination hook from choosing the unread ID, but ReportFetchHandler still calls openReport without any override and openReport always sends useLastUnreadReportAction: true (src/pages/inbox/ReportFetchHandler.tsx:156, src/libs/actions/Report/index.ts:1587-1596). The server can therefore return the unread-centered page; since aligned reports now ignore oldestUnreadReportAction, a long thread opens on that partial unread page instead of the created/top-anchored window, so the scrolling behavior still regresses for exactly these unread top-aligned reports.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Makes sense, but I'm not sure we can safely adjust it.
Without useLastUnreadReportAction: true I guess OpenReport will always return the newest messages, while for transaction threads we need oldest first. Ideally we should have similar BE flag for this scenario.
App/src/libs/actions/Report/index.ts
Line 1595 in 0d736c7
But overall, I'm not sure if it's super often case to have transaction thread with so long messages history to have pagination.
cc @mountiny
|
Rest of failing jest tests are not caused by this PR updates |
|
I've noticed one existing bug while testing this issue. no_unread_message_indication_thread.mp4 |
melvin-bot
Bot
requested review from
sobitneupane and
trjExpensify
and removed request for
a team
|
@sobitneupane 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
Bot
requested review from
a team and
Valforte
and removed request for
a team
"Latest messages" pill shows if the user is 2000px + from the list end and there is no unread message. So for transaction thread, we want to:
Correct? |
|
Yeah, that would be my vote. |
|
I'm waiting C+ review from @sobitneupane |
|
Reviewing the PR. |
…thread-opening # Conflicts: # src/hooks/useReportActionsListModel.ts # src/hooks/useReportActionsPagination.ts # src/hooks/useReportActionsScroll.ts
|
@VickyStash Could you please take a look at the following screen recording? When a user scrolls to the bottom of the chat, the view automatically jumps back to the top. Steps to reporduce:
Screen.Recording.2026-07-03.at.14.39.33.movScreen.Recording.2026-07-03.at.14.53.32.mov |
|
It looks like some side effect from the existing on prod issue (if I mark the message as unread there user is auto-scrolled to the top): prod_behaviour1.mp4I'll take a closer look in a bit. |
|
@sobitneupane I've applied an update, can you please let me know if it's better for you? |
|
Thanks for the update @VickyStash. I am not longer able to reproduce the issue. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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 Issuessection 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
Testssection - I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the
QA stepssection - 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 verified the steps for local testing are in the
- 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.
toggleReportand notonIconClick). - 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)
- 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.
- 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 usingAvatarhave 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
thisproperly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. foronClick={this.submit}the methodthis.submitshould be bound tothisin the constructor) - Any internal methods bound to
thisare necessary to be bound (i.e. avoidthis.submit = this.submit.bind(this);ifthis.submitis never passed to a component event handler likeonClick) - 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
Avataris modified, I verified thatAvataris 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
Designlabel and/or tagged@Expensify/designso 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
mainbranch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to theTeststeps. - I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.
Screenshots/Videos
Android: HybridApp
Screen.Recording.2026-07-06.at.17.02.00.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2026-07-06.at.17.04.31.mov
iOS: HybridApp
Screen.Recording.2026-07-06.at.17.23.29.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-07-06.at.17.13.21.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-07-06.at.16.40.03.mov
|
We did not find an internal engineer to review this PR, trying to assign a random engineer to #94668 as well as to this PR... Please reach out for help on Slack if no one gets assigned! |
|
✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release. |
|
🚧 Valforte has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here. |
|
🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
|
|
🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/Valforte in version: 9.4.29-0 🚀
|
|
🤖 Help site review — no changes required I reviewed the changes in this PR against Expensify's help site files under Conclusion: No help site updates are required. Why: This PR is a purely internal frontend fix to the initial scroll-position logic in This is invisible UX/scroll-anchoring behavior with no new feature, setting, tab, label, or button, and no change to any documented workflow. Nothing in the public help articles describes report scroll-positioning behavior, so there's nothing to update. Since no changes are required, I did not create a draft help site PR. If you feel a specific article should describe this behavior, let me know which one and I'll draft the update. @VickyStash, please confirm you agree no help site changes are needed here. (No help site PR was created since the change is internal-only — if you'd like one, point me to the article to update.) |
|
🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/Valforte in version: 9.4.31-0 🚀
|
|
🤖 Help site review: no changes required I reviewed the changes in this PR against the help site articles under This PR is an internal UX bug fix to the initial scroll-position logic in This is behind-the-scenes scroll behavior. It does not add, rename, or remove any user-facing feature, tab, setting, label, or button, and the help site does not document how reports position their initial scroll. I searched the articles and found no content describing this behavior that would now be inaccurate. No draft PR was created since no help site updates are needed. @VickyStash, if you believe a specific article should describe this behavior, let me know which one and I'll draft the update. |
|
🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/grgia in version: 9.4.31-0 🚀
Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry): |
7 participants
Explanation of Change
Fixes the initial scroll position logic in
useReportActionsScroll.Previously, when a report was aligned to the top (transaction thread, money request, or invoice report), the unread marker could still override the linked report action and drive the initial scroll position.
The logic now ensures:
shouldBeAlignedToTopistrue:initialScrollKeyis driven only bylinkedReportActionID; the unread marker is ignored.shouldBeAlignedToTopisfalse: the linked action takes priority, falling back to the unread marker.Fixed Issues
$ #94668
PROPOSAL: N/A
Tests
Offline tests
Same, as in Tests section
QA Steps
// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."
Same, as in Tests section
PR Author Checklist
### Fixed Issuessection aboveTestssectionOffline stepssectionQA stepssectiontoggleReportand notonIconClick)src/languages/*files and using the translation methodSTYLE.md) were followedAvatar, I verified the components usingAvatarare working as expected)StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))npm run compress-svg)Avataris modified, I verified thatAvataris working as expected in all cases)Designlabel and/or tagged@Expensify/designso the design team can review the changes.ScrollViewcomponent to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.mainbranch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to theTeststeps.Screenshots/Videos
Android: Native
android.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
android_web.mp4
iOS: Native
ios.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
ios_web.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web.mp4