Skip to content

83847 migrate merge transaction v2 - #96897

Merged
mjasikowski merged 16 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
huult:83847-migrate-merge-transaction-v2
Jul 27, 2026
Merged

83847 migrate merge transaction v2#96897
mjasikowski merged 16 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
huult:83847-migrate-merge-transaction-v2

Conversation

@huult

@huult huult commented Jul 23, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #83847
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Same QA step

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

  1. Open the Expensify app.
  2. Go to the workspace chat and create 2 receipt expenses.
  3. Open one of the expenses and tap More.
  4. Select Merge.
  5. Verify that the merge list page opens and you can navigate back normally.
  6. Select another receipt expense and tap Continue.
  7. Verify that the merge receipt page opens and you can navigate back normally.
  8. Complete the merge options and tap Continue.
  9. Verify that the merge confirmation page opens and you can navigate back normally.
  • 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
  • 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: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-07-25.at.14.00.28.mov

@huult
huult requested review from a team as code owners July 23, 2026 16:19
@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from suneox and removed request for a team July 23, 2026 16:19
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 23, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@suneox 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
melvin-bot Bot requested review from heyjennahay and removed request for a team July 23, 2026 16:19
@huult
huult marked this pull request as draft July 23, 2026 16:19
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jul 23, 2026 •
edited by github-actions Bot
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/SCREENS.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)
.../components/MoneyRequestHeaderSecondaryActions.tsx 0.50% <ø> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
src/libs/Navigation/linkingConfig/OldRoutes.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/Navigation/linkingConfig/config.ts 66.66% <ø> (ø)
.../TransactionMerge/MergeTransactionsListContent.tsx 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...nsactionMerge/DynamicMergeTransactionsListPage.tsx 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...ages/TransactionMerge/DynamicDetailsReviewPage.tsx 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...ages/TransactionMerge/DynamicReceiptReviewPage.tsx 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/ROUTES.ts 21.88% <0.00%> (+0.15%) ⬆️
...gation/AppNavigator/ModalStackNavigators/index.tsx 6.50% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 2 more
... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes

chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]
chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jul 23, 2026
View reviewed changes

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 5f732b3279

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread src/pages/TransactionMerge/DynamicConfirmationPage.tsx Outdated
@huult
huult marked this pull request as ready for review July 24, 2026 09:10
chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]
chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jul 24, 2026
View reviewed changes

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: fa9bb8d127

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread tests/unit/hooks/useSelectedTransactionsActions.test.ts Outdated
@suneox

suneox commented Jul 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@huult Can you attach screenshots and resolve the ESLint, test failures.

@huult

huult commented Jul 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@suneox I added a recorded video to the attachment session. The failed checks seem unrelated to our PR. I’ll merge main on Monday to fix them.

@huult

huult commented Jul 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@suneox The failed test was fixed after I synced with main. Could you take a look?

@suneox

suneox commented Jul 27, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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 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
    • 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
    • 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 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
CleanShot.2026-07-27.at.11.51.37.1.mp4
CleanShot.2026-07-27.at.11.55.29.2.mp4
CleanShot.2026-07-27.at.12.23.03.1.mp4
Updated screenshots 1 1-1-before-expense-detail-sideB 1 1-2-entry-merge-list-empty 1 1-3-after-back-expense-detail-restored 1 2-1-before-expense-header-before-merge 1 2-2-entry-header-merge-entry 1 3-1-before-search-2-txn-selected 1 3-2-entry-search-bulk-merge-skip-list 1 4-1-before-search-2-identical-selected 1 4-2-entry-search-bulk-merge-skip-list 1 5-2-entry-forward-nested-merge-path 1 5-2-entry-forward-nested-normal-entry 1 6-2-entry-deeplink-merge-list-restored 1 7-1-before-old-top-level-list-oldurl 1 7-2-entry-old-top-level-list-redirected 2 1-1-before-merge-list-both-receipts 2 1-2-entry-receipt-review-page 2 2-1-before-receipt-review-receipt1-selected 2 2-1-before-search-2-identical-receipt-selected 2 2-2-entry-receipt-receipt-review-identical 2 2-3-after-continue-receipt-to-confirmation-no-conflict 2 3-2-entry-receipt-to-details-conflict 2 4-2-entry-refresh-receipt-sibling 2 5-1-before-old-receipt-oldurl 2 5-2-entry-old-receipt-redirected 3 2-2-entry-details-to-confirmation-nested-url 3 3-2-entry-refresh-details-sibling 3 4-1-before-old-details-oldurl 3 4-2-entry-old-details-redirected 4 1-2-entry-identical-skip-to-confirmation 4 2-1-before-confirmation-ready-to-merge 4 2-2-entry-merge-complete-result 4 3-3-after-back-back-through-wizard-expense-restored 4 4-2-entry-refresh-confirmation-sibling 4 5-1-before-old-confirmation-oldurl 4 5-2-entry-old-confirmation-redirected 4 6-1-before-search-confirmation-ready 4 6-2-entry-search-merge-complete
DYNAMIC_ROUTES.MERGE_TRANSACTION_LIST — Merge list (pick source expense)

Case 1.1 — Entry: Expense report → More → Merge (1 expense) → list

1 1-1-before-expense-report 1 1-2-entry-merge-list 1 1-3-after-back-expense-report

Case 1.2 — Entry: Transaction header → Merge

1 2-2-entry-expense-header-more-menu

Case 1.3 — Entry: Search → bulk Merge 2 expenses (skip list)

1 3-2-entry-search-page-context

Case 1.4 — Entry: Search selected transactions → Merge

1 4-2-entry-search-selected-context

Case 1.5 — Forward: pick source from list → receipt/details

1 5-1-before-merge-list-with-eligible-source 1 5-2-entry-forward-other

Case 1.6 — Refresh / deeplink new list URL

1 6-1-before-expense-report-pre-refresh 1 6-2-entry-merge-list-restored

Case 1.7 — ⚠️ Backward-compat: old URL /merge/<transactionID>

1 7-1-before-oldurl-standalone 1 7-2-entry-oldurl-result

Case 1.8 — Entry: Search RHP expense → header Merge → list

1 8-2-entry-search-expense-rhp-context

Case 1.9 — Forward: list opened from Search → Continue keeps Search listBackPath

1 9-2-entry-forward-from-search-context
DYNAMIC_ROUTES.MERGE_TRANSACTION_RECEIPT — Receipt review

Case 2.1 — Entry: 2 receipts → bulk Merge → receipt page

2 1-2-entry-receipt-blocker-no-receipt-expense

Case 2.2 — Forward: receipt → confirmation (no conflicts)

2 2-2-entry-receipt-forward-blocker-no-receipt

Case 2.3 — Forward: receipt → details (has conflicts)

2 3-2-entry-receipt-details-blocker-no-receipt

Case 2.4 — Refresh / deeplink new receipt URL

2 4-2-entry-receipt-refresh-result

Case 2.5 — ⚠️ Backward-compat: /merge/<id>/receipt

2 5-2-entry-receipt-oldurl-result
DYNAMIC_ROUTES.MERGE_TRANSACTION_DETAILS — Details review

Case 3.1 — Entry: conflicts → details

3 1-2-entry-conflict-details-details

Case 3.2 — Forward: details → confirmation (resolved) — core regression check

3 2-2-entry-details-to-confirmation

Case 3.3 — Refresh / deeplink details

3 3-2-entry-details-refresh-result

Case 3.4 — ⚠️ Backward-compat: /merge/<id>/details

3 4-2-entry-details-oldurl-result
DYNAMIC_ROUTES.MERGE_TRANSACTION_CONFIRMATION — Confirmation + complete

Case 4.1 — Entry: identical → confirmation (skip)

4 1-2-entry-identical-forward-result

Case 4.2 — Complete merge: Merge button → success (report entry)

4 2-2-entry-complete-merge-blocked-api

Case 4.3 — Full happy path (PR QA mirror) + Back-through-wizard

4 3-2-entry-back-wizard-code-verified-p1

Case 4.4 — Refresh / deeplink confirmation

4 4-2-entry-confirmation-refresh-result

Case 4.5 — ⚠️ Backward-compat: /merge/<id>/confirmation

4 5-2-entry-confirmation-oldurl-result

Case 4.6 — Complete merge from Search → dismiss + open expense in Search RHP

4 6-2-entry-complete-from-search-context

@suneox

suneox commented Jul 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@huult It looks like these issues still haven't been resolved.

@huult

huult commented Jul 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author
Screen.Recording.2026-07-27.at.11.03.20.mov

@suneox I've fixed the old routes. Could you take a look?

@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested a review from mjasikowski July 27, 2026 06:06
@mjasikowski
mjasikowski merged commit c4843c4 into Expensify:main Jul 27, 2026
35 checks passed
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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

@OSBotify

OSBotify commented Jul 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

✋ 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

github-actions Bot commented Jul 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #96897.

Android 🤖 iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-c4843c439bd-fefd261-5c74c25268fc66fe3ccd7e849f880c960883c394/index.html https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-c4843c4-fefd261-8bf38252cd0491eb1d6aaa994e53fba5915515c6/index.html
Android iOS
Web 🕸️
https://96897.pr-testing.expensify.com
Web

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

@OSBotify OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jul 27, 2026
Closed
@OSBotify

OSBotify commented Jul 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mjasikowski in version: 9.4.45-0 🚀

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

@MelvinBot

MelvinBot commented Jul 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🤖 No help site changes required.

This PR is an internal navigation refactor — it migrates the four Merge Transaction routes (MERGE_TRANSACTION_LIST/RECEIPT/DETAILS/CONFIRMATION) from the backTo-parameter pattern to createDynamicRoute() with entryScreens. It changes how back-navigation is wired internally, not what the user sees or does.

Why no docs update is needed
  • The changes are limited to route definitions (src/ROUTES.ts, src/SCREENS.ts), navigation types/config, and the internal wiring of the Merge pages. No user-facing labels, buttons, tab names, or feature behavior were added or changed.
  • The Merge (combine expenses) user flow described in the QA steps is unchanged — users still tap More → Merge, pick a second expense, review, and confirm exactly as before.
  • Nothing in App/docs/articles documents the internal back-navigation mechanism, so there is nothing to update.

Because there is no user-facing change, I did not create a draft help site PR — there is nothing to document.

huult, if you believe a user-facing behavior did change here and warrants a help site update, let me know what it is and I'll draft the PR.

@applause-bot applause-bot Bot mentioned this pull request Jul 27, 2026
Closed
7 tasks
@lanitochka17

lanitochka17 commented Jul 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Deploy Blocker #97147 was identified to be related to this PR.

@lanitochka17 lanitochka17 mentioned this pull request Jul 27, 2026
Open
4 tasks
@applause-bot applause-bot Bot mentioned this pull request Jul 28, 2026
Open
7 tasks
@OSBotify

OSBotify commented Jul 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 9.4.45-14 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector[bot] chatgpt-codex-connector[bot] left review comments
@mjasikowski mjasikowski mjasikowski approved these changes
@heyjennahay heyjennahay Awaiting requested review from heyjennahay
+1 more reviewer
@suneox suneox suneox approved these changes
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@huult huult

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@huult @suneox @OSBotify @MelvinBot @lanitochka17 @mjasikowski